Talk:Hasidic Judaism/Archive 2

Not "The" Ukraine

"The" Ukraine is an outdated semi-pejorative traditionally perpetuated by Russian nationalists to make Ukraine seem to be less of a legitimate entity. Unfortunately, this linguistic tic had over the years been picked up by native English speakers (including a number of prominent newscasters) and this was copied by some of the chattering classes. Fortunately, people are becoming cognizant of the loaded and perhaps offensive nature of 'The' Ukraine and we see it less and less. Unfortunately, this article still had a few instances - I have replaced them with the historically and linguistically correct "Ukraine." Mazel tov. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.26.0.171 (talk) 14:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Poland and Russia" or "Belarus and Ukraine"?

both are given as where the movement originated, within a few lines of each other. which is it? Richardson mcphillips1 (talk) 21:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be appropriate to mention what position the mainstream jewish scholars take on this chasidic sect? Traditionally, they have rejected any decisions made by more liberal rabbis. Does the same apply to chasidic ones as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.221.155.29 (talk) 23:24, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No idea what you mean. Chassidim are mainstream. -- Zsero (talk) 04:40, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tevilas Ezra -- Tisha Kabim

If I recall correctly, this was a takana sheayn Hatzibur yachol la'amod bo (an enactment which was too difficult for the community [community here being the entire nation of Israel] ), and was considered to be neve enacted (nullified ab initio ) (Talmud Berachos, IIRC, but its been a while) So the text was incorrect. Secondly, why Non-Hasidim immerse is irrelevant and extraneous in this article. So for both reasons, that text was removed. -- Avi (talk) 23:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The takana was repealed because it discouraged people from learning Torah, but it was a valid takana while it lasted. It remains a midas chassidus, especially since the Baal Shem Tov is said (sorry, no source) to have held that it was only repealed for Torah and not for Tefilah (or in another version I've heard, the BShT reinstated it for Tefilah). Either way, gein in vasser is related to Ezra's original gezera, at least as a midas chasidus. I'm reinstating it, with a slight change of wording. -- Zsero (talk) 00:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I need to check that out, IIRC, the din by takanos sheayn Hatzibur yachol Laamod bo is nullification ab initio. Cf. R' Moshe ZT"L's teshuva on hand-clapping on Shabbos. Furthermore, why is this explanation needed here; it appears to be out of scope, or if anything, should be discussed under uses of mikvah. -- Avi (talk) 16:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's primarily a chassidic thing. At least among Ashkenazim, few non-chassidim used to do it until the recent chassidisation of the non-chassidic world. People who don't do opsheren, or celebrate yortzeits, or have separate weddings, don't go to mikveh except on Erev Yom Kippur. In the same way that Litvaks and other non-chassidim have adopted other chassidic practises, to a much smaller extent some have started to adopt this one too. Even today, I don't think you'll find any such thing as a men's mikveh in any non-chassidic Ashkenazi community. Those that go regularly use chassidishe mikvaos. In the old days, on Erev YK they either used the women's mikveh, or the keilim mikveh! -- Zsero (talk) 16:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

gerrer wedding video

i have a gerrer wedding video with thousands of people attending. this is the link http://youtube.com/watch?v=owi6tzww-0Q. let me know if you think it is an appropriate video to post on the page. thanks 129.64.143.32 (talk) 21:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)jonah[reply]

Perhaps on the page about ger. -- -- -- 20:35, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Matisyahu

Matisyahu is a famous example of a Hasidic Jew

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matisyahu

"Matisyahu (born Matthew Paul Miller, June 30, 1979) is an American reggae musician.

Known for blending traditional Jewish themes with Reggae, rock and hip hop sounds, Matisyahu is most recognizable for being a hasidic Jew. As such, Matisyahu stands out for wearing the traditional clothing of Hasidic Jews and not performing on Shabbos." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.169.122.30 (talk) 01:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Vilna Gaon portrait.gif

The image Image:Vilna Gaon portrait.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Revision

I'm a non-Jew who came to this page to learn about Hasidism, and frankly half of this doesn't make any sense to me. Someone needs to revise this so it's more useful to people who are new to the subject. It reads like a guidebook for those already familiar with the terms and concepts, and, well, it's not especially helpful for those trying to learn. I mean, that's the point, right?

I agree with you. There is a lot here that needs explaining. Please help by pointing out that which is not clear (phrases etc.) Also please sign your name and date it. Benqish (talk) 09:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have to keep in mind that Hasidic Judaism is a subset of Haredi Judaism, which in turn is a subset of Orthodox Judaism. It would make more sense if you would first read about Orthodox Judaism, then about Haredi Judaism, and then about Hasidic Judaism. Then, you would probably understand a lot more. It is just as that you won't understand the article P53 if you didn't read about cell biology, apoptosis and other subjects first. I don't see any problem there. One needs to start from the beginning of a subject, not jump right into it without any previous knowledge. Not all articles on Wikipedia need to start from the absolute beginning: that would be impossible. Articles would have to be simplified to such an extent that they would become useless to most readers. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 22:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, but P53 is linked primarily from obscure biology topics, but Hasidic Judaism is linked from Bible, Judaism, Prayer, Aleister Crowley, etc. Asking that readers come here from Haredi Judaism when this is the more heavily linked topic, both in Wikipedia and in real life, is unrealistic. Not all topics on Wikipedia need to start from the absolute beginning, but any topic that will be found on a regular basis by non-experts needs to handle that fact; Wikipedia's article on cancer can't require that the reader understand cell biology.--Prosfilaes (talk) 16:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I have two master's degrees, but a sentence like "This populist emotional revival accompanied the elite ideal of nullification to paradoxical Divine Panentheism, through intellectual articulation of inner dimensions of mystical thought" is beyond me, because it is simply in a poor writing style. That's because the first clause is a series of prepositional phrases and specialized, obscure terms or usages like "nullification." Rewrite so we have clear subject-action-object. Who had "the elite ideal of nullification"? What exactly went "to paradoxical Divine Panentheism"? Does "elite" signify a group or is it an adjective, but if an adjective, to whom is the ideal elite? "Paradoxical" to whom? Etc. The 2nd half of the sentence has the same problems. Even academic language is supposed to be clear.Markdf10825 (talk) 12:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markdf10825 (talk • contribs) 12:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. See new section below. -- -- -- 21:14, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

at Prelude, "flourished based on just the simple understanding getting deeper from there." makes no sense to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.171.49.37 (talk) 03:12, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nusach Ari

There is an incorrect assertion about Chabad and Nusach Ari. Nusach Sfard is Ari, The Bostoner Chassidim daven the same nusach for example. A clarifiation needs to be made.--Saxophonemn (talk) 18:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean when you say that Nusach Sephard is Nusach Ari? From what I know, Nusach Ari is a mix of Ashkenaz and Sephard.

XavierAJones (talk) 01:27, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hasidim instituted many changes in the prayers. These changes were mostly based on the nusach of ARI and on the nusach of Sepharadim in general. Hence, they began to call this new nusach "Nusach Sephard" while others (including CHABaD) began to call the new nusach "Nusach ARI". -- -- -- 21:23, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yiddish

It just happens to be the Yiddish dialect of the places from which most chasidim originally came.

In the context, "it" can only refer to Ashkenzi Hebrew. This is not, of course, a type of Yiddish. 72.75.118.41 (talk) 13:12, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Current position

Needs to be edited to reduce redundancy - it repeats info about Hasidic Jews in various communities as if lifted from two or more sources; needs to be combined. I've done some editing, but it needs more.--Parkwells (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Hi, I was wondering if we should use this image anywhere in thie article? It's quite high quality, and possibly superior to many of the images currently being used. 84.92.117.93 (talk) 17:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I put the image in Payot. -- -- -- 23:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article was defaced

Regular placement of the Unreferenced content and Citation needed templates were placed under each heading and the end of each paragraph. None of them made any sense. All but one were dated May 2009. It seems reasonable to assume this was an act of vandalism.Kckid (talk) 08:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pantheism/Panentheism...

I am new to the subject of this article, but under "Rabbinic Opposition" I believe "pantheism" is not the correct word here but rather "panentheism". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.159.185 (talk) 03:15, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chabad Messianism under Rabbinic opposition

Would someone like to write something regarding Chabad Lubavitch's Messianism, that is belief in their Rebbe as Messiah. The 6th Rebbe after Schneur Zalman of Liadi, Menachem Mendle Schneerson, YECHI. --Teacherbrock (talk) 21:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC) Considering the mitnagdim's worries regarding Chassidim, it is only ironic that the most well known and maybe populous chassidus is Chabad which chants YECHI and paints billboards with YECHI proclaiming Rebbe as Mashiach. --Teacherbrock (talk) 21:40, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is an article here on it: Lubavitch Messianism . 129.98.153.196 (talk) 20:35, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Book

I'm quite shaky on this, but shouldn't Andre'Schwarz-Bart's "Last of the Just" be listed among the references? It's fiction, I realize, but I recall that it covered much of the same territory as the article. Yes, I could be very wrong. I read the book some 50 years ago.Abenr (talk) 07:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Idolatry

"His example began the characteristic veneration of leadership in Hasidism as embodiments and intercessors of Divinity for the followers.[citation needed]" Citation needed indeed - I find this slightly offensive, and certainly mus-representative. If no-one can provide a citation from within Chabad, I will feel justified in removing this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leegee23 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The river photo

The photo of a river about 1/5 down the page (in the section on Baal Shem Tov) is NOT Podolia, but a different region of Ukraine about 1000 km to the east (Donbas). I didn't want to just delete the photo, because there is some useful text accompanying it, but the photo needs to be replaced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.106.105 (talk) 02:21, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brooklyn: "Orthodox Abuse Suspects Get Exemption"

I'm uncomfortable about posting this, as it will probably be misunderstood, but the above headline is from the Jewish Daily Forward[1]:"Last month the Jewish Daily Forward reported that Brooklyn D.A. Charles Hynes was keeping the names of ultra-Orthodox Jews charged with, and even convicted of, sex crimes secret because of the "very tight-knit and insular" nature of the community. Victims' rights groups believe that such protections endanger children and encourage a culture of cover-ups that has long persisted among Hasidic Jews, as detailed inthis 2006 New York story by Robert Kolker."[2]. That article has the title "On the Rabbi's Knee:Do the Orthodox Jews have a Catholic-priest problem?" See also [3], [4], [5]. Dougweller (talk) 11:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is still a problem.[6] Doug Weller (talk) 17:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hasidic Judaism and Women

I'm told Hasidic Jews have really backward ideals concerning women, like they are not supposed to touch them and they want to be served by male clerks at stores. At a glance I haven't noticed anything about that.

--173.179.106.132 (talk) 06:19, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has nothing to do with women per se. It's about touching a member of the opposite sex (whether male or female).
Not touching (or being touched by) a member of the opposite sex is a matter of halakha applicable to all Jews. (See Negiah). It is not at all limited to the hasidic.
Due to the above, orthodox (again, not only hasidic) Jews might prefer to be served by clerks of the same sex (again, whether male or female), so as to avoid being touched by a clerk of the opposite sex while receiving change.
Whether or not these issues might be considered "backward" is a matter of opinion, while Wikipedia editors must adhere to a neutral point of view. (See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view).

-- -- -- 19:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

---I agree in that the Wikipedia article shouldn't bring up the opinion of backwardness or not. That said, this articles have a shining absence of women-related facts. As an example, look at the huge section about Hasidic clothing under the titles "Dress", "Headwear", "Other distinct clothing", "Hair" and "Tzitzis": it's ALL about MALE clothing! Women have their own puny little category with a blatant lack of the same details that cover the men's clothing. This also goes for other sections in the article covering various rituals and other facts – it's like there are no hasidic women in existance. I have no expert insight in hasidism, so I beg someone who does have it: please, make this article more gender balanced and add facts about these women who, in this family-centred branch of judaism, surely do exist. :) Nikoneer (talk) 22:34, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First paragraph

Wikipedia is meant to be accessible to any reasonably well educated person. I am a PhD student at a well-respected school, who is also Jewish (but not Hasidic). I could not read this paragraph. Would someone translate it to English? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.148.32 (talk) 04:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

These two sentences "His example began the characteristic veneration of leadership in Hasidism as embodiments and intercessors of Divinity for the followers.[citation needed] Contrary to this, Hasidic teachings cherished the sincerity and concealed holiness of the unlettered common folk, and their equality with the scholarly elite." contradict each other. PhilomenaO'M (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hasidic garment

I think this needs revision: "Contrary to popular belief, Hasidic dress has little to do with the way Polish nobles once dressed. (The Emancipation movement probably started this myth in the late 19th century in an attempt to induce younger Jews to abandon the outfit.) Interestingly, secular Yiddish writers of old, living in Eastern Europe (Sholom Aleichem, for example) appear to have no knowledge of the "Polish origin" of the dress. Likewise, numerous Slavic sources from the 15th century onwards refer to the "Jewish kaftan". The Tsarist edict of the mid-19th century banning Jewish clothing mentions the "Jewish kaftan" and the "Jewish hat" and, as a result of this edict, Hasidim modified their dress in the Russian Empire and generally hid their sidelocks. Modern Chabad Lubavitch wear the Prince Albert frock coat substitutes for the bekishe reflecting this change, while many Polish Hasidim do so by wearing a redesigned shtreimel sometimes known as a spodik.[citation needed]"

The argument with Sholem-Aleichem is flawed (why should he even care?). And the author offers no reliable sources and seems prejudiced. This article (general article on Jewish dress), on the contrary, offers pretty reliable sources: http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Dress. I would urge somebody to correct this passage, and offer a more just discussion of the topic. This has nothing to do with an "encyclopedia objectivity". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henrietty (talk • contribs) 09:08, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thanks for your input. -- -- -- 02:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]