So there's a bit of an ongoing discussion amongst the Lubavitchers at work regarding that old hobby horse of mine, tachanun. You see, our non-lubabitch brethren (of the hassidic ilk) very rarely, if ever, say the penitential prayers during the afternoon services. Why is this? I'm not quite sure. Perhaps they're worried about time. A noble trait, to be sure, but one that nonetheless rings hollow. If they wanted to say tachanun, they'd make time. Besides, from what I hear, they pretty much never say 'em anyway, regardless of context. But hey, that doesn't bother me. To each their own.
The question naturally arises when one davens with a minyan lead by these non-sayers: to say or not? Some are of the opinion that there's no need to say Tachanun, and in fact it's a bad thing. After all, there is the dictum of "Al tifrosh min hatzibbur," and when the minyan isn't saying something, why should we?
On the other hand, I am a Lubavitcher, and as such, I have the arrogance to assume that everything I do (mitzad Lubavitch) is the correct thing to do. In this case, when everyone is merrily skipping their way past tachanun and right onto aleinu, I begin to beat my chest and repent for my evil. When fellow Lubavitchers question my behavior, I ask them if they'd ever say tachanun on 19 Kislev. Obviously they wouldn't. So why is it any different here?
I could think of many examples where, as Lubavitchers, we thumb our noses at the world. Just because this time it would be convenient to go along with everyone, does that mean we should do it? I know that some people will think, "Well, it's not like you're eating chalav akum." But really, is it that different? They're both commandments from G-d.
What say you?
Friday, October 15, 2010
Tachanun redux
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
86 comments:
I say nothing.
I merely subscribe.
You should do as the hippies of Tzfat do, go to a forest and start yelling.
e: really? Nothing to say? How uncharacteristic.
Sara: unfortunately, there are no forests in Manhattan.
-E: as they tend to say - those who say the least often need to be heard the most :) Twas a pleasure seeing you at the party.
Nice of you to invite me to the party.
In lakewood, I had to daven at a satmar shul, and they never do tachanun at mincha. I later asked Rabbi Winner, a rav and shliach in Brighton Beach, who said if it wouldn't cause friction, it would be better for me to say tachanun to myself.
If it is mincha ktana, you do not say tachanun as that is the halacha and the beeber wearers are doing the right thing albeit by accident. If not, you should say (per my rav who would not like his name online) unless it's 5 or 28 iyar (per me.)
Since you are lubavitch and this is non-lubab halacha, feel free to do the opposite. ;)
-TRS: You were invited!
Yossi: see, I like causing friction...
Modeh: what is this "small mincha" of which you write?
Mottel: wait, I was? When was this?
mincha ktana is 2.5 sha'os zmanios before shkia.
(shkia is the time after which snags no longer daven mincha, and chasidim no longer daven shacharis)
I say you follow your Rebbe. Since there is no wright or wrong answer and everyone does something different just follow your Rebbe.
I think it is like Kiddush. Some people stand, some sit, and some do a little of both. None of them are right or wrong just follow your minhag.
TRS - follow your <3
(I have been in college too long).
floutietootie: Oh really? There's no right or wrong? What is this? A creative writing class?
I like it when people say there is no right or wrong but then go ahead and blame BP for the oil spill. Such inconsistency of thought...
If Reb Mendel Futerfas could say mincha in Siberian camps, you can man up and say mincha at the face, lehavdil, of Chagas adversity.
I mean, Tachnun at Mincha.
Modeh: And where does it say that you shouldn't say tachanun at that time?
Flutie: Nu, what did my Rebbe say?
le7: Too long.
e: Is there right and wrong?
CA: Right and wrong have nothing to do with responsibility.
Did he say tachanun in the camps?
Dear Mr. R.S.;
From a different perspective, it intrigues me that not having to say tachanun (e.g. a groom is discovered hiding under one of the seats) produces such joy among congregants. I cannot think of a ready example, but, when it is learnt that other sections may be omitted from the daily prayers, there is little response, except perhaps a groan from those who've already said that part, and the davening moves on. With tachanun however its different - there is a distinct feeling of relief in the shul. Its not as if it adds a significant amount of time to a regular service either. Perhaps it has something to do with being reminded of one's iniquities? Not having to acknowledge them means not having to deal with your failings (theoretical or otherwise)...
Contemplating the mystery of tachanun, LdToot.
Failings?
Alle halacha sforim. (i.e. the one's I've read and recall off hand without taking time to look up, i.e. Mishna Brurah)
Dear Mr. R.S.
Au contraire! I in no way intended to suggest your failings as in "your" failings. As far as this humble commentator is concerned Mr. R.S. is quite without failings. It was a mere figure of speech (cf. bridegroom hiding under a chair...).
Most respectfully yours, LdT.
Modeh: your memory is not a source.
LdT: Oh, I know! I just couldn't think of anything intelligent to respond to you.
No, but Mishna Brura is and that's the only one my memory is valid for. Certain chagas sects also omit tachanun on Fridays and Sundays.
Page number?
I don't think it's accurate to refer to all non-chabad hasids as "chagas."
Are there also Nechy chassidim?
I'm not sure about that, but there's definitely plenty of nebby chassidim.
We are Re'usah d'liba chasidim!!
Meaning what? You say tachanun or not?
A re'usah is to a shtar what a sircha is to a cow's lung. What does it mean that Breslovers are re'usah d'liba chasidim? Safek Treyfos?
TRS: nothing to do with tachnun. I'm just pointing out that you chabad folk assume that if you're not chabad, then you're chagas, as if Chabad and Chagas were all there is. Maybe the non-Chabad are Re'usah d'liba?
Modeh: רעותא דליבא, not ריעותא
see http://www.tyndalearchive.com/tabs/jastrow/ (I can't make a link to individual pages)
Thanks, transliteration makes for some very funny misunderstandings sometimes.
Thanks for the link to Reform Rabbi Dr. Professor Orthodox Rabbi Marcus Jastrow.
Nu, so explain the difference between chagas and Re'usah d'liba.
I beg your pardon. You explain the difference, mister I-serve-God-with-my-intellect Chabadnick. I believe this matter is discussed extensively in Chabad chassidus.
Lubavitchers don’t serve G-d with intellect. They serve G-d with their hearts, their soul, and their might.
The use intellect as the source of emotions to make sure that the emotions are pnimiyusdik and are actually about G-d as opposed to about their shuckeling.
I don't know why Jastrow is so looked down upon. Maybe it's because they immediately assume that anyone who studies Hebrew/Aramaic as a language and knows Greek must be an apikores.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Jastrow
Suede Hosid: You seem to be The Real Lubavticher around here. Maybe you can explain to these Cretans the difference between Reusah d'liba and chagas.
I am the fake Lubavitcher here. The real Lubavitcher is e. I wasn’t aware that people here were from Crete, although I always suspected it about TRS.
TRS: why wouldn’t Reb Mendel say Tachnun in prison?
breslover: Is the matter discussed extensively? Can you provide a source for this assertion?
e: Actually, I always thought Jastrow was kind of cool.
CA: As everyone knows, Brighton=Crete.
I mean, is there a story of his having said it in the gulag?
TRS: Just stop. you're displaying an embarrassing ignorance of chassidus.
Brighton, MA or Brighton Beach, NY?
breslover: Yes, it's very embarassing. Now please provide a source.
CA: MA. Wait, is Beth Israel in Brighton or Brookline?
sefer halikkutim, erech reusah d'liba, somewhere in sefer hamamarim 5661, and balayla hahu 5620.
I'll have to get my hands on those, but meanwhile, I came across this interesting little article- http://www.nachalnovea.com/breslovcenter/articles/Comparing_Chabad_and_Breslev.pdf
I don't know how accurate it is, so don't attack me on that front.
e: He isn't looked down upon at all. They just don't like to talk about him too much because he busts too many myths. It's like Lubavitcher wine.
breslover:
Cretan == from Crete
Cretin == submoronic herring fresser.
CA: He wouldn't have said tachanun in prison because the labor camp days ended after shkia and you don't say tachanun that late k'mo she'biarnu.
what if he was on guard duty?
They put prisoners on guard duty?
There is a famous moshol that Reb Mendel Futerfas gave about how a beinoni fights with his yetzer horah.
He would serve the guard duty, and it would sometimes be quite cold (the camp being situated somewhere in Siberia). So, when it is cold, one really wants to go to sleep. But he knew: if he went to sleep, he’d freeze to death on a spot. So, he told himself: “If I didn’t go to sleep the last hour, I can stay awake for the next five minutes.” And he would count five minutes in his head. And then he would tell himself the same thing again. And this way he would stay awake the whole duration of the duty.
The same way, said Reb Mendel, a beinoni tells himself: “I can avoid sinning for the next five minutes...”. Etc.
(I must say: I once tried this technique while driving from NYC to Boston late at night, and I still almost fell asleep. But then I realized that I was running low on gas, and I was on that stretch of I-95 that had almost no gas stations, and I stopped being sleepy.)
Who certified you?
The chief rabbi of Israel. Indirectly.
Maybe I should’ve said “certifiable”.
CA: Does he know about this?
Modeh: BTW, the chagas people don't say tachanun when davening mincha before katana either.
my bad: that's supposed to be balayla hahu 5760.
modeh: In Soviet prison camps, prisoners occupied all sorts of moderately powerful positions. You didn't spend twenty years sitting in a cell.
I don't learn maamarim that were said in 5760.
damn! I mixed up 5760 and 1960. I meant 5720=1960.
you should learn that ma'amer anyway, because it rocks the house. And then listen to the tape and hear the rebbe cry when he talks about the jew who is far from god. good stuff.
Learn I have learned it. In the past. Once we hit shloshim yom lifnei hachag I'll go for it again IY"H.
Regardless, you don't sound like much of a breslover.
sheesh. it was just an example of a sect that might not appreciate being labeled chagas.
Gosh, I feel like I'm talking to myself here.
2. Did I ever label them chagas?
Blogger The Real Shliach said...
CA: Does he know about this?
Modeh: BTW, the chagas people don't say tachanun when davening mincha before katana either.
nobody called breslov in particle chagas, but people were labeling non-chabad chassdim as chagas.
Did I mention Breslov?
Labels are very good for pigeon-holing people.
http://www.chabad.org/blogs/blog_cdo/aid/718642/jewish/Labels-Are-For-ShirtsAnd-For-People-Too.htm
“Many years ago my son also went to a church camp.”
These people don’t get it
Excellent point she makes.
I'll take your word for it. I never read the article
CA: That point, on the other hand, was rather moronic.
The point of the article is that you should label yourself, not others.
“When you marooned me on that G-d-forsaken spit of land, you forgot one very important thing, mate: I'm Captain Jack Sparrow.”
Lately I've been into the Hobbit. At least I was, but now I've realized that it's just a poor excuse for chassidus.
Both my kalla and I don’t understand what that means. (And both are into Hobbit and, lehavdil, Chassidus.)
Have you ever read the backstory?
Of Chassidus or, lehavdil, the Hobbit?
Either.
Yes I have. There was once a professor of English literature who thought it was quite sad that England did not have its own mythology (since Anglo-Saxon mythology was destroyed by invading Normans) and had to borrow from Celtic mythology, either from Ireland, Scotland and Wales, or, even worse, from France (where all the King Arthur myths came from).
And since he thought that Harry Potter just wouldn’t do it, the professor wrote his own mythology basing it on the mythologies of other Northern Germanic peoples.
On the other side of Europe, there was a Jew who saw that many frum Yidden around him were spending hours learning Torah and doing mitzvos, but their Yiddishkeit was lacking a key component: Eibeshter. He decided to give Him to them.
You ever read the Silmarillion (or however it's spelled)?
I started reading it. But Tolkien’s Universe is very different from, lehavdil, Chassidus. Tolkien was a Catholic. And he believed that there were two forces at play in the world: the good and the bad. The ring leaves Gollum because it’s trying to return to its master (the bad force at play), but then Bilbo Baggins, the hobbit, finds it (the good force at play).
Lehavdil, in Chassidus, there is only one Lord of the Rin... I mean, there is only one King of the Universe, and everything that happens is a result of the force of good. Monotheism, baby.
Which is exactly why it's a poor excuse for chassidus. There's a whole creation myth, and about twenty million pages of info, but at the end of the day, why do I need it? I have chassidus!
Started reading it and then stopped, that is.
But one can skip the whole beginning of Silmarillion and still enjoy Tolkien’s writings. They are not about revealing his religious beliefs (unlike C.S. Lewis’s Narnia), they are just about telling a good story in the style of Nordic sagas.
Which is exactly why one should stick to The Hobbit and LOTR- even though much that remains mysterious can be explained, what's the point?
but at the end of the day, why do I need it? I have chassidus!
Well, there are two points here. One is reading literature in search of some deep truth. Which is what I used to do as a teenager and stopped doing once I discovered Chassidus. And that’s why I still can’t read writers like Dostoyevsky who are preaching from the pages about morality and eternal truths. Thanks, I can just learn, lehavdil, Tanya.
But then there is reading literature for a good story, for immersion into another world, and just for entertainment. In these aspects, Tolkien’s writings are not replaced by Chassidus. (Although, one could argue whether or not a servant of Eibeshter should be entertained, but that’s another story.)
Which is exactly why one should stick to The Hobbit and LOTR- even though much that remains mysterious can be explained, what's the point?
The point is that other books have other stories.
Btw, I disagree with Tolkien’s views on technology.
But why bother breaking your head over other stories when you have judaism at your beck and call?
You can ask that about any piece of entertainment. I suppose the simple answer is that sometimes people need to be entertained, just like sometimes they need to eat ice cream or sushi or croissants with sour cream.
There's entertainment, and there's replacement.
Post a Comment