The Hargchober and other Hasidim

By the way, I once thought that maybe the location is a factor, meaning that Poland and Galicia are Galicians, and the Lithuanians think more systematically. And I am talking about Polish scholars who are not Hasidic (like Rek), who are indeed honest.

Can you give a representative example of the Ebenezer regarding the illusory wart?

Minchat Hinuch was close to Hasidism. He, the HaKetzats and the Netivot, were all Galicians.

The Manach is indeed a good example (he also has "hassidic" issues). The Katzvah and the Netivot are indeed a counterexample.

For example, the Havna 7 settlement on the contradiction in the teaching regarding the obligation of women to kill Amalek and their exemption from the war against the Seven Nations. Truly astonishing words. O’Haq 6:17:

a) The teaching wrote at the end of Parashat Tetze [4:3] that women are not commanded to kill Amalek, only males who are men of war [and therefore are exempt from the commandment] and this is puzzling. After all, regarding the killing of the Seven Nations, it was written in the mitzvah of Tetze that it is done with males and females. And the Mishnah already hinted at this in his glosses:

b) And it seems that the teaching wrote that every individual also has an obligation if one of the descendants of Amalek comes near him to kill him. And this is also found in women, as in the case of Sisera and Jael. And why did it say that the mitzvah only applies to males who are men of war. However, it should be said that the time of the ritual is not on Shabbat, so that the obligation of death is not more severe than that of other death-deserving persons who do not postpone Shabbat. In times of war it is said [Deuteronomy 22:1] until it falls on Shabbat [Sabbath 19:1]. However, since they are women of war, they are only allowed to do so if a single person comes to their aid, then they do not postpone Shabbat. And since Shabbat is not the time of this mitzvah for women, it is important that it is not the time at all, as is clear from the Mishnah of Decharitot 1:1, in the case of the light falling on eighty-one days, which are compared in the case of the day of eighty-one days that fall on Shabbat, and in the case of the day of the week, they did not respond only because Shabbat is suitable for a public sacrifice. However, if there is no sacrifice, it is likened to night. And it should not be made difficult because this mitzvah is for people in times of war. It is not a question of whether they are a people by themselves. And since they are women, there is no Amalek sacrifice on the Sabbath. He did not consider this time of commandment to be a time of obligation for him at all, and it was a time of obligation for him [and in the Book of the Law in matters of circumcision]:
3) But killing a Jewish people does not cause harm according to the understanding of the Hirshonim, Chapter 1 of Kiddushin [33. See also Baran and Tuss Rek, letter 7], since there is a "thou shalt not do" even in the act of oblivion. Here, it is said, "Thou shalt not do, thou shalt not live." But even apparently, Tuss Kiddushin (page 34) is interpreted to mean the opposite, is it not that killing a Jewish people is so that they will not be taught to do it? And it is similar to killing a pest. The act of performing a work that does not require a body is exempted from most of the jurists and it is practiced from the Torah even on Shabbat:
d) And apparently it should be said that killing a commoner is practiced on Shabbat. The time of the mitzvah is also important with regard to killing an Amalek. Just as the time of an individual sacrifice is important because it is appropriate for a public sacrifice. But it is not similar to killing an Amalek for the past to avenge him and killing a commoner for the future so that they will not learn. And the sons of Bekta did not have a single one:

Actually, I know the example of Amalek. It's definitely very amusing. I think I heard that from you once. Just, if you have another example, I'd be happy to have some fun.

I don't remember right now. You can search, and I guess it's not very hard to find.

What about non-Polish Hasidic scholars?

What about them?

We will also discuss whether “place is a factor,” sociological affiliation, or the Hasidic field of activity.

I assume both are factors in different doses. But I haven't done any research.

You are annoying. “Hassidism distorts thought”?! No less, no more. I will remove the tracking from the site. Rabbi in Israel, be careful with your words.

As you know, Vilnius was under Polish rule between the two wars – during this period, were the people of Madania considered Lithuanians or Poles? 🙂 And what about Hungarians? 🙂

With best wishes, Józef Pilsudski

Mom, what a fear!

The rabbi is half Lithuanian, half Hungarian?
And speaking of geographical influences, isn't the rabbi afraid because the rabbi lives in Lod?

In the name of the Lord, we bless you 5750.

For the Strudel, Shalom Rav,

Lod was a place of Torah already in the days of the Sages. Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi lived in Lod, whose souls were influenced by the love of Torah and its diligence. Even the “Lod Challenges” were known for their sharpness.

Added value is given to Lod by its proximity to the airport, where air connections with the entire world are maintained, and it symbolizes the spiritual openness to world science and culture, which allows for both influencing and receiving fruitful ideas.

Indeed, in this openness, extreme caution is also needed not to be carried away by every "common spirit," and as Rabbi Kook said in his speech at the opening of the Hebrew University (in the "Articles of Rabbi Kook"), regarding the "honor of the Gentiles" that flows to Zion, one must not only "have a heart full of fear," but also "have fear," and caution should accompany openness.

With blessings from Shabbat Tava, G. Hanun

In paragraph 3, line 3
… One must not only maintain ‘and widen your heart’, but also…

My heart is in Lithuania and I am at the end of Hungary. How will I eat and how will it be in the West, at the end of the West.

In the year 1521, the most famous is the name ‘Honger y-H’, which expresses the hunger (in Yiddish: hunger) to hear the word of God.

Indeed, Ramada was accurate in his writing ‘At the end of Hungary… at the edge of the west’, as Hungary was divided into ’Upper Galilee’ (Oyber Land) in the west, whose Jews tended in their language and customs to Ashkenazi Judaism; and in contrast, ‘Lower Galilee’ (Unter Land), whose Jews tended to the centers of Hasidism in nearby Galicia.

In the blessing of ‘Shabta Teva’, Lavinger Shamshon

The Jewish nickname for Hungary was ‘Eretz Ger’, because in the translation of the verse in Psalms 14:7: ‘The tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab and the sojourners’, the word ‘the sojourners’ – ‘Hungarian’