Michoel

Regarding the issue “exclusion”.
I’ve never personally experienced the examples given. While in aveilus every shul in my town was showed me the amud without failure. Also, my circle of friends does include FFBs, but somehow it never occurs to me to “take stock” of who comprises this chevra, since to me it’s hardly relevant.

My chevrusa of 3+ years is FFB, and come to think of it, so is my wife.

Pardon the “about face” but there might be some relevant material here to add some insight to “BT-FFB Tension”.

Right after Yom Kippur and still thinking about new “kabalos” for the new year to improve my Avodas HaShem, I mentioned to my brother-in-law (wife’s sister’s husband) that I was considering taking on Cholov Yisroel but noticed a lack of support from my spouse.

My brother-in-law replied, to my surprise, that because his situation, residing in a community where 95% are in kollel (he isn’t) he feels no choice but to follow the Cholov Yisroel discipline. However, for someone in my position, I could and should rely on Rav Moshe’s heter for Cholov Stam.

He elaborated that for me it might sound fresh and intriguing to take on Cholov Yisroel, but my Bais Ya’acov educated wife just might see it as another external trapping that doesn’t add anything substantial to one’s true Yiddishkeit.

Now, the point here is not making a pitch for or against Cholov Yisroel, not whether or not to rely on Rav Moshe’s heter, or about “chumras” in general.

It was a personal case; an example that cited by my Lakewood-educated bro-in-law explained (ironically) with both bluntness and sensitivity to be aware of differences in my and my spouse’s outlooks espcially if it touches upon possible BT-FFB chasms.

So perhaps, there are a lot of misunderstandings where the FFB through their experiences are somewhat more wizened to situations that BTs have yet to experience or understand.

Rav Menashe Klein is of course considered a top-tier posek and some would say a Gadol HaDor.

However, the personal anecdotes which accompany the Mekoros creates some lingering suspicion that something tangential is at work here as well.

From comment #12:

“When we see that baalei t’shuvah are less than appreciated in some circles, are we asking whether or not there are valid reasons for that exclusion? Maybe there are. We can’t disregard viewpoints because they are emotionally uncomfortable.”

It’s one thing for a Posek/Gadol HaDor who is bringing down an opinion L’Shma, to confront and publicize crucial issues which happen to leave some or many less than comfortable or feeling warm inside.

However, it’s another issue entirely when Ploni Ba’alHabus exploits a P’sak for personal reasons and patur themselves from among other things, Derech Eretz.

This is course, and unfortunately, not unprecedented. One doesn’t even have go back as far as the Ya’acov Emden/Yonasan Eibushutz milchama. At least the respective followers turned it into a milchama.

When Rav Moshe and the Satmar Rav disagreed on a P’sak, it was also regarded as L’Shma by Gedolim. However, many a layman follower used a machlokes l’shem shomayim for their own personal war and morphed into the maturity equivalent of “My Rebbe can beat up your Rebbe”.

Also from # 12

“When we see that baalei t’shuvah are less than appreciated in some circles, are we asking whether or not there are valid reasons for that exclusion? Maybe there are. We can’t disregard viewpoints because they are emotionally uncomfortable.”

Yes, there is a mekor about one particular topic, but are BT-FFB tensions limited solely to HaRav Klein’s particular p’sak? Or to shiduchim only? To use your term, “exclusion” from what? From a planning or finance committee of a shul? From davening at the amud? From trusted circles of people who presently conduct lifestyles 99% identical?

Point is, there are issues ad infinitum presented in the blog; one person’s justified issue is another’s incredulous one. To compact it all into one challenging (and yes, contentious) issue based on what may be an example of da’as yachid gives one the right to question intentions.

“The prevalent attitude, when baalei t’shuvah encounter FFBs that look at them as being of inferior yichus, is to say that the FFBs have a problem that needs correction”.

Maybe this attempt of an analysis is baseless but it’s worth a try. Your quote above is inconsistent. The reisha speaks about BT’s encounting PARTICULAR FFB’s who in the BT’s mind are less than amicable while the seifa implies that the BT’s ergo jump to a conclusive generalization that ALL FFB’s harbor identical prejudices.

Regarding the earlier remark of being patur from derech eretz. In no way does this imply that this is Reb Michoel’s derech. Your admission that this personally pains you speaks volumes in a positive way and yes sometimes even in a cold world some cold water in the face is necessary if that’s what the truth requires. No one should find fault with that.

However to borrow an idea from an Aish.Com article about the etiquette of being a guest: A guest should never berate the hosts’ children no matter how seemingly justified or if the hosts are doing the same. When the host berates his/her children it’s within the context of accompanying parental love and responsibilities.

This analogy can be applied to Poskim and those who “take up” the p’sak. A follower of the p’sak is utilizing the Posek’s words alone and is free from the backbreaking responsibility (and in HaRav Klein’s case, an eye witness of Europe’s death camps) and the literal partnership with Hashem which is the Posek’s life and which frames the p’sak. Everyone should be aware of the differences and what the manifestations can bring.

To once again borrow, this time from another post, thank you for your Mekoros and providing a virtual Beis Medrash aspect to this blog. Kol Tuv and Hatzlacha.

-JH

What right does someone – anyone – have to judge another person? To say, effectively, “this ‘past’ life of yours – and I define what is ‘past’ – no longer counts and is not part of who you are, and I don’t want to hear about it.” That is negating an identity. Someone said that a person is the sum total of their experiences, so how is it possible to basically discard a portion of someone’s life experiences? Like someone else said, it was not a mistake that someone was born FFB since Hashem doesn’t make mistakes; therefore, if Hashem doesn’t have a problem with it, neither should human beings.

If one peruses the Aish HaTorah website, it is very obvious that those contributors have absolutely no problem discussing their past lives because those experiences are springboards for their growth. Our Chabad friends here are BT, and we frequently talk about their past lives; how the rebbetzin used to want to be a vet and how the rabbi was in a band and doing drama. And they have never expressed shame!

If someone is uncomfortable with who I am, past present and future, too bad, I am not editing.

I apologize for this rant, but if not in this blog, then where?

For neither, for Hashem’s kavod an aveira being negating of both His will and His Kavod. But here’s the rub; are Tinokos Shenishba capable of sinning i.e. commiting aveiros? IMO far from being a chilul Hashem admitting to having been in an Ashram and subsequently embracing yiddishkeit after being educated in it’s tenets is a great kiddush hashem.

So I’m puzzling over this. A person isn’t supposed to talk about it, but it must be that the people in the film got heterim because they are doing it l’toeles. So I wonder: for whose benefit is that halacha? Why should someone else react so strongly to someone else’s mention of their past? Are we supposed to be quiet for our kavod, or for other people’s comfort?

I never stopped being Jewish. I tell people that if I am a “baal” of anything it is of shyalot (sorry I can’t spell this Hebrew words).

I am a master of Questions, not of answers. And really I say that in complete jest, because I haven’t mastered the art of the Question yet. That is for Gemorrah study. But I digress. Mainly I try to keep a level approach to this process and definitely agree with the Rav Greenman at being surprised to meet people who tried to deny their past.

Daniel

Interestingly enough, there were some technical difficulties that delayed the showing of the film, so one BT got up and told her story. She was a very “obvious” BT. In the crowd of sheitels, including hats on sheitels, she wore a turquoise and fringy teichel which matched her clothes. But she got a great response from the ladies.

After a while, I spoke up, too. I didn’t tell my whole teshuva story, but I did tell over the story I brought up here in my post Wearing the Label. It seems many people in the Chareidi world feel that that BTs should keep our journeys quiet. I personally can see it both ways. I suppose the balanced approach of neither hiding nor announcing it is probably the best approach of all. In “Inspired,” people were telling their stories l’tzorech mitzvah, and of course, that’s the best reason of all.

That precendent is brought in the g’marra to show that very point which is a very powerful and important limud. It is inconceivable to me that the gadol hador held himself and / or his children were assur to marry but was m’vatel his daas to the other g’dolei hador, and yet there is no mention of the issue anywhere in Chazal, even in the sugyah that brings his shita that the product of an issur lav is a mamzer. We can speak confidently of “anywhere in Chazal” because such thing would be so outstanding that we would have heard about it. Is it conclusive %100? No. But m’farshim and t’shuvah s’farim rely on rayas that are less conclusive, IMO.

If one would be willing to accept my “rayos”, we actually can now turn back around, and support the idea that in the time of chazal, even the amei ha’aretz were “frum”.

“A niddah who immersed herself without any intention [to change her status], i.e., she fell in the water, or simply entered the water to cool off, is permitted to her husband.”
This means that if a woman KNOWS that she was tovel in an ocean (even without intent) she is now muttar. When we speak of baalei t’shvuah that are adults looking back twenty years later, we can be toleh that if they have nice middos, m’istama their mother went swimming without a chatzisa that is m’akev bedieved. An FFB can marry them on the assumption that they are not pagum because they are B’ETZEM MUTTAR IN ANY CASE. This definitely does NOT mean, that if the halacha was like Rebbi Akiva, ie that the product of relations that was an issur lav is a mamzer and assur lavo b’kahal m’doraisa, that Reb Moshe would be mattir them to marry a non-mamzer symply on the strenght of their nice middos (as PROOF that the mother was tovel in an ocean).

Aside from this nice intellectual stimulation (thank you!), there is another issue that irks me. Our wives, the heligeh alumni of Neve, IYAHT etc, tend to be extremely farfrumpte and extreme when it comes to hilchos nidda. My rav here has had a lot of problems from baalos t’shuvah that were overly nervous about the subject (at least until a few years after marriage). It strikes me as something a stira to, on one hand, be very, very concerned that chas v’shalom we shouldn’t be nichshol in an issur kares and cause our children to be pagum, and then turn around and say “Nisht g’farelach! Mistama his mother fell off the edge of a dock!” Every thing Reb Moshe said was certainly emes gamur but there is still a concept of a p’sak being “mercifull”. I think this is such an example.