"Ani Ma'amin" in ArtScroll Siddur

[connco...@gmail.com]

quoted from from the discussion at
https://groups.google.com/forum/?authuser=0#!topic/soc.culture.jewish.moderated/UdD1Arj2Zp4%5B126-150-false%5D

On Sunday, April 25, 2010 6:51:06 PM UTC-4, cindys wrote:
> On Apr 25, 5:20 pm, lee <schotn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 25, 9:19 pm, cindys <cste...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Apr 24, 11:13 pm, lee <schotn...@gmail.com> wrote:> > I'm not O, so maybe it's inappropriate for me to answer,
> >
> > > > I thought you were O Cindy
> >
> > > -----
> > > No, I am not, and I have said many times on this forum that I am not.
> > > Best regards,
> > > ---Cindy S.
> >
> > Do you mind if I ask what denomination (if thats the right term) you
> > are then (I'm only curious, no ulterior motive, honestly) ?
> -------
> I'm just Jewish. I don't belong to any denomination.
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.

_______________


cindys wrote:
"No, I am not [Orthodox]"

cindys wrote:
"I don't belong to any denomination"

Now I finally understand.

Cindy kept claiming that I was wrong when I said that Orthodox believe in Rambam's 13 Principles of Faith, even though I linked to several Orthodox Web sites showing that Orthodox do accept it as an expression of the foundational beliefs of Judaism.

http://www.orthodox-jews.com/principles-of-judaism.html#axzz3MnVcgWLL

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/332555/jewish/Maimonides-13-Principles-of-Faith.htm

http://www.aish.com/sp/ph/48923722.html

When I repeatedly pressed Cindy to to be specific about which Orthodox groups allegedly reject which of Rambam's 13 Principles, she finally said that individual Orthodox persons allegedly privately reject some of Rambam's 13 Principles, such as belief in Messiah and beleif in resurrection.
As though what some individuals privately think has anything to do with the Orthodox group's official position on Rambam's 13 Principles.
And how would Cindy know that some Orthodox individuals privately reject Messiah and resurrection?
And Cindy claimed that Orthodox groups are allegedly moving away from belief in Messiah and belief in resurrection because she claimed that they never mention those things in their services.

Now I discover that Cindy is not Orthodox,
so her claims about Orthodox belief should be examined closely.

Now I present further proof that Orthodox do endorse Rambam's 13 Principles of Faith:

The ArtScroll Siddur / Prayer Book is one of the most widely-used Orthodox siddurim in the world.

"For decades, Mesorah Publications has towered over the English-language Jewish publishing world like a Goliath.
The Orthodox publishing firm's siddur, produced under the ArtScroll imprint, is the most common prayer text in American Orthodox synagogues"
http://www.thejewishchronicle.net/view/full_story/2308987/article-ArtScroll-facing-challenge-from-Modern-Orthodox
http://matzav.com/jta-report-claims-artscroll-facing-challenge-from-modern-orthodox

Our Orthodox shul uses that ArtScroll Siddur.
They used it when the shul had a "regular Orthodox" rabbi.
They continued to use that Artscroll Siddur when a Chabad rabbi took over.

Page 178 of the "The Complete ArtScroll Siddur" says:

"The Thirteen Principles of Faith
...
have achieved virtually universal acceptance
...
It is commendable practice to recite the Thirteen Principles every day after Shacharis."

Pages 179-181 of the ArtScroll Siddur say:

"I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith
...
I believe with complete faith"

Which shows virtually every Orthodox shul
reciting every one of Rambam's 13 Principles of Faith
every day.

So there are 2 possibilities:

1. Orthodox say things that they do not really believe.

2. Orthodox say those things because they really believe those things.

Unless someone has proof that #1 is the case,
"dan l'chaf zechus" of Leviticus 19:15
dictates that you should assume that #2 is the case.

Happy Hanukka.

Dean Collector of Vintage Conn Brass Instruments

[cindys]

I never said the 13 Principles weren't part of the official Orthodox theology or that "Orthodox Judaism" had rejected them. What I said was that nobody can know what individuals think or believe and that includes people who identify as Orthodox and attend Orthodox synagogues. I also said that it is my opinion that not everyone who identifies Orthodox or lives in an Orthodox community or attends an Orthodox synagogue accepts all of the 13 Principles. And I also said that the Orthodox community (at least the one I know) does not generally make the 13 Principles a topic for conversation. If they did, I'm sure they would all articulate that they believe them, but a person can never know what's going on in somebody else's mind.

>
> When I repeatedly pressed Cindy to to be specific about which Orthodox groups allegedly reject which of Rambam's 13 Principles,

You asked me "Which Orthodox reject them?" NOT which Orthodox "Groups" reject them. I said I didn't know which Orthodox reject them because people are sensible enough to keep their private thoughts to themselves, i.e., toe the party line or at least not contradict it if they want to remain part of the O community.

>she finally said that individual Orthodox persons allegedly privately reject some of Rambam's 13 Principles, such as belief in Messiah and beleif in resurrection.

Yes, I do believe there are individuals within the O community who reject belief in Messiah and resurrection of the dead. I also believe there are gay people and agnostics and atheists within the O community. So, what of it?

> As though what some individuals privately think has anything to do with the Orthodox group's official position on Rambam's 13 Principles.

I didn't know you were allegedly talking about the Orthodox groups' "official position." I never claimed the 13 Principles weren't part of the official position. I was talking about individuals the entire time, and I thought you were as well. If you weren't, then why were you discussing a hypothetical situation where a rabbi notices someone isn't reciting certain prayers, questions the person about it, officially excludes the person from the minyan or denies that person synagogue membership. I wrote that I've never heard of such a thing in my entire life. At no time were we discussing what is the "official position" of Orthodox Judaism

> And how would Cindy know that some Orthodox individuals privately reject Messiah and resurrection?

And how would you know they don't privately reject Messiah and resurrection? And how would you know if they are agnostics or atheists? How would you know what any person's private thoughts are or aren't? I wrote that I don't know what individual's private thoughts are, and *neither do you.*

> And Cindy claimed that Orthodox groups are allegedly moving away from belief in Messiah and belief in resurrection because she claimed that they never mention those things in their services.

What???? Now, you're fantasizing. I never said any of that. Please cite where I said Orthodox "groups" are moving away from this belief and where I said those things are never mentioned in their services? I said that I had never heard individuals having private conversations about these topics.

>
> Now I discover that Cindy is not Orthodox,
> so her claims about Orthodox belief should be examined closely.

Oh, okay.

>
> Now I present further proof that Orthodox do endorse Rambam's 13 Principles of Faith:

Of course the Orthodox party line is to endorse them. I never said otherwise. I said I suspected that a number of individuals privately rejected some of them and had the good sense not to articulate their private thoughts.

In short, I think you're confused about what I wrote, and you should go back and re-read my post. You are presenting a strawman argument.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Shelly]

Well, Cindy, would you now agree that he is "tolling". He has
[deliberately] misrepresented what you have said many times, just as he
misrepresented what I said when he accused me of calling the Orthodox
idiots -- which, of course, I never did (and explained his error to him
five times).

--
Shelly

[cindys]

On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 11:57:31 AM UTC-5, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:
snip

>
> Well, Cindy, would you now agree that he is "tolling". He has
> [deliberately] misrepresented what you have said many times,

snip
-----
No, I still don't think he is.

That said, I can't see where anything I wrote was the least bit ambiguous. He asserts that I claimed there are (established?) groups of Orthodox Jews who have officially rejected the 13 Principles and/or that the 13 Principles are not found in Orthodox siddurim and goes on to cite several Orthodox siddurim to demonstrate that I am "wrong" (about these things that I never wrote). And then he says it's not so surprising that I am unaware of these things (i.e., that I'm unfamiliar with the Artscroll siddur?) because I'm not Orthodox.

Huh? I am totally befuddled. I would challenge him (or anyone reading this) to show me where I posted that the 13 Principles had been officially rejected from some Orthodox congregations or suggested that the Ani Ma'amin was absent from Orthodox siddurim.

What I actually said was: I am of the opinion that there are a certain percentage of Jews who identify Orthodox yet who privately reject some (or maybe all? who knows?) of the 13 Principles and are smart enough to keep their mouths shut about their private beliefs because they wish to continue to be part of their O communities. That's it.

Oh...I also wrote that I had never heard of anybody being expected to express belief in the 13 Principles (or any other specific beliefs) as some sort of litmus test before being allowed to join an O synagogue or being counted for a minyan.

And as long as we're on the subject, I have also never heard of a would-be O convert being expected to articulate belief in the 13 Principles as part of the criteria for conversion. The distinguishing part of an O conversion is that O converts are expected to agree to accept the yoke of the mitzvos. And while they may be asked about some of their beliefs (such as belief in one God), it would beggar belief (no pun intended) that they would be asked to attest to belief in resurrection of the dead (e.g.) as a requirement for conversion.

As far as my statements regarding O Jews who privately reject some of the 13 Principles is concerned, even going so far as to say I believe there are agnostics and atheists among their numbers... I have read anecdotally on other fora that there are anonymous discussion boards for agnostic/atheist Jews who publicly identify Orthodox and nobody ever knows what they are really thinking. I also know there is a phenomenon called "Social Orthodoxy" a phenomenon amongst some of the MO community where people walk the walk and talk the talk, (i.e., keep kosher, keep shabbos etc) for social reasons and not because of belief. Just do a Google search for "Social Orthodox" and you can read all about it.

So, in short, no, I don't think this guy is a toll, but I also can't fathom why he's pretending that I made a whole bunch of statements that I never made.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Shelly]

On 12/24/2014 1:24 PM, cindys wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 11:57:31 AM UTC-5, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:
> snip
>>
>> Well, Cindy, would you now agree that he is "tolling". He has
>> [deliberately] misrepresented what you have said many times,
>
> snip
> -----
> No, I still don't think he is.
>
> That said, I can't see where anything I wrote was the least bit ambiguous. He asserts that I claimed there are (established?) groups of Orthodox Jews who have officially rejected the 13 Principles and/or that the 13 Principles are not found in Orthodox siddurim and goes on to cite several Orthodox siddurim to demonstrate that I am "wrong" (about these things that I never wrote). And then he says it's not so surprising that I am unaware of these things (i.e., that I'm unfamiliar with the Artscroll siddur?) because I'm not Orthodox.

You know why you can't see where anything you wrote is amiguous? Well,
that is because it isn't and he wrote what he did NOT because he didn't
understand you. He did it because it fits his agenda. That is why I
say he is a "toll".

> Huh? I am totally befuddled. I would challenge him (or anyone reading this) to show me where I posted that the 13 Principles had been officially rejected from some Orthodox congregations or suggested that the Ani Ma'amin was absent from Orthodox siddurim.
>
> What I actually said was: I am of the opinion that there are a certain percentage of Jews who identify Orthodox yet who privately reject some (or maybe all? who knows?) of the 13 Principles and are smart enough to keep their mouths shut about their private beliefs because they wish to continue to be part of their O communities. That's it.

To anyone without an agenda, that is obvious.

> Oh...I also wrote that I had never heard of anybody being expected to express belief in the 13 Principles (or any other specific beliefs) as some sort of litmus test before being allowed to join an O synagogue or being counted for a minyan.
>
> And as long as we're on the subject, I have also never heard of a would-be O convert being expected to articulate belief in the 13 Principles as part of the criteria for conversion. The distinguishing part of an O conversion is that O converts are expected to agree to accept the yoke of the mitzvos. And while they may be asked about some of their beliefs (such as belief in one God), it would beggar belief (no pun intended) that they would be asked to attest to belief in resurrection of the dead (e.g.) as a requirement for conversion.
>
> As far as my statements regarding O Jews who privately reject some of the 13 Principles is concerned, even going so far as to say I believe there are agnostics and atheists among their numbers... I have read anecdotally on other fora that there are anonymous discussion boards for agnostic/atheist Jews who publicly identify Orthodox and nobody ever knows what they are really thinking. I also know there is a phenomenon called "Social Orthodoxy" a phenomenon amongst some of the MO community where people walk the walk and talk the talk, (i.e., keep kosher, keep shabbos etc) for social reasons and not because of belief. Just do a Google search for "Social Orthodox" and you can read all about it.
>
> So, in short, no, I don't think this guy is a toll, but I also can't fathom why he's pretending that I made a whole bunch of statements that I never made.

...because that is what he does. He did it to Fred. He did it at least
five times to me. And now he is doing it to you. He is a "toll".

> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.
>


--
Shelly

[connco...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:20:15 AM UTC-5, connco...@gmail.com wrote:

_____

It is important to note what happens on page 181 of "The Complete ArtScroll Siddur", during the weekday Shacharis service.

IMMEDIATELY after "The Thirteen Principles of Faith" is "The Ten Commandments".

"I believe", then "I will do".

Because a person's belief is the basis for the person's action.

If a person does not believe, then he will not bother to do.

If a person does believe, then he will do.

Now note what happens earlier in the service, on pages 14-15 of the siddur.

At the beginning of the Shacharis service, the people sing "Yigdal", the poetic version of "The 13 Principles of Faith".

So the people affirm their belief in the 13 Principles of Faith TWICE during the weekday Shacharis service, at the beginning and at the end of the service.

[henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net]

It may be commendable practice to recite them every day but I have never partaken of a minyan which does so.
Henry Goodman

[Harry Weiss]

Most of us here are quite familiar with Cindy and we respect and trust her
especially when looking at someone who appears to have a severe Kelkaku
syndrome.,

--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com

[Giorgies E Kepipesiom]

On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:20:15 AM UTC-5, connco...@gmail.com wrote:
>

> "For decades, Mesorah Publications has towered over
> the English-language Jewish publishing world like a
> Goliath.

I hope you realize that ArtScroll/Mesorah is a private business. They have no more official standing in Orthodox Judaism (or any other kind) than any other printing and publishing company. They "tower over" only because they do a nice job of typesetting, layout, printing and binding, and because they have excellent advertising agents, and copy-writers for their advertisements.

> The Orthodox publishing firm's siddur, produced under
> the ArtScroll imprint, is the most common prayer text
> in American Orthodox synagogues"

Again, only because of their advertising hype and the material quality of their books. Not because they are in any way holier or more authentically orthodox than anyone else's publications.

>
> Our Orthodox shul uses that ArtScroll Siddur.

Which proves exactly what?

> They used it when the shul had a "regular Orthodox" rabbi.
> They continued to use that Artscroll Siddur when a Chabad
> rabbi took over.

Again, what does it prove? Do you think the Chabad rabbi made a conscious and deliberate decision to continue using ArtScroll rather than change to Tehillat Hashem, because ArtScroll had Ani Maamin and Tehillat Hashem doesn't?

>
> Page 178 of the "The Complete ArtScroll Siddur" says:
> "The Thirteen Principles of Faith

> have achieved virtually universal acceptance

As Papa used to say: "hat er gesagt".

> It is commendable practice to recite the Thirteen
> Principles every day after Shacharis."

Yes, it is "commendable". Not very widespread, I'm afraid. How many people actually recite it every day? or even once a week? Most have their T&T off and are out the door even before the last kaddish.

>
>
> Which shows virtually every Orthodox shul
> reciting every one of Rambam's 13 Principles of Faith
> every day.

No, it shows that many (far from "virtually every) Orthodox shuls have on their shelves siddhurim that contain these passages. It shows nothing about what anyone actually recites.

>
> So there are 2 possibilities:
> 1. Orthodox say things that they do not really believe.
> 2. Orthodox say those things because they really believe those things.

There is a third possibility: the vast majority of Orthodox to not say it at all.

>
> Dean Collector of Vintage Conn Brass Instruments

I suggest you stick to what you know (brass instruments and the like) and cease pontificating on things you know nothing at all about.

GEK
whishing everyone a very happy Zos Chanukka

[cindys]

On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 2:11:50 PM UTC-5, connco...@gmail.com wrote:
snip

>
> So the people affirm their belief in the 13 Principles of Faith TWICE during the weekday Shacharis service, at the beginning and at the end of the service.

----
It wouldn't change what I wrote even if they recited the "13 Principles" ten times during the service. Do you really believe that every single person who sings Yigdal means every word of it, and if somebody didn't believe it, he wouldn't sing it?

People daven (pray) by rote. I suspect that many of them show up for minyan just because that's what you do when you're part of an O community. And they typically daven so fast that the words are barely unintelligible and then they rush out the door because they need to get to work.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Shelly]

Wow. That makes three Orthodox posters (You, Harry and Henry) who have
just either rebutted or slammed him.


--
Shelly

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 8:49:03 PM UTC, Giorgies E Kepipesiom wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:20:15 AM UTC-5, connco...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Again, only because of their advertising hype and the material quality
> of their books. Not because they are in any way holier or more
> authentically orthodox than anyone else's publications.
> >
> > Our Orthodox shul uses that ArtScroll Siddur.
>
> Which proves exactly what?
>

They translate
Ani ma'amin be-emunah shelemah

as "I believe with complete faith", which isn't good metrical English,
because you've got a stop between "with" and the hard c of "complete".

It should be "I believe with a perfect faith ... "

[henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net]

Art Scroll translations aim to provide the meaning of the Hebrew text in English; there is no attempt to write good metrical English.
Henry Goodman

[Arthur Kamlet]

In article <m7f3cc$4m3$1...@reader1.panix.com>,

Harry Weiss <hjw...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>
>Most of us here are quite familiar with Cindy and we respect and trust her
>especially when looking at someone who appears to have a severe Kelkaku
>syndrome.,

I believe it was Dr. Rabbi Josh Backon who told us about the
similar Shmukel effect.

--

ArtKamlet at a o l dot c o m Columbus OH K2PZH

[mm]

On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 21:00:35 +0000 (UTC), cindys
<cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

>
>People daven (pray) by rote. I suspect that many of them show up for minyan=
> just because that's what you do when you're part of an O community. And th=

>ey typically daven so fast that the words are barely unintelligible

I didn't think the words one person said were meant to be intelligible
to anyone else, except in a few cases, for example the shaliach tsibur's
words at the start of the amidah and at the ends of some paragraphs.

And I can tell you that the faster I can read the MORE I understand what
I'm saying. It's not that one causes the other, but as my Hebrew has
improved, I can read faster and at the same time understand it better.

One can probably observe the same thing even in, especially in, his
native language. For one thing, that except with complicated material,
read for the first few times, reading more slowly does not increase
understanding.

> and the=
>n they rush out the door because they need to get to work.=20

For example, reading again the sentence above slowly:

they rush out the door because they need to get to
work.

does not make one understand it better. And I'm talking about reading
it the second or third time. The 100th time one reads it, in the same
context, in the same paragraph, one knows in the blink of an eye what it
will say. Reading, even at the highest speed anyone reads, actually
slows the person down and gives him time to think about the meaning of
the words.

And there is still time to pause during the prayers and think about an
idea within them, maybe a different idea each day.

>Best regards,
>---Cindy S. =20

--

Meir

[mm]

On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 22:14:32 +0000 (UTC),
"henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net" <henry.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:58:27 PM UTC, malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:
>> On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 8:49:03 PM UTC, Giorgies E Kepipesiom wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:20:15 AM UTC-5, connco...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >
>> > Again, only because of their advertising hype and the material quality
>> > of their books. Not because they are in any way holier or more
>> > authentically orthodox than anyone else's publications.
>> > >
>> > > Our Orthodox shul uses that ArtScroll Siddur.
>> >
>> > Which proves exactly what?
>> >
>> They translate
>> Ani ma'amin be-emunah shelemah
>>
>> as "I believe with complete faith", which isn't good metrical English,

Metrical English he wants!!

>> because you've got a stop between "with" and the hard c of "complete".
>>
>> It should be "I believe with a perfect faith ... "

I noticed this line last, after all that follows, this doesn't have the
same meter as the Hebrew does. Nor does perfect mean the same thing as
complete.

>Art Scroll translations aim to provide the meaning of the Hebrew text in English; there is no attempt to write good metrical English.
>Henry Goodman

He should already know that there are three or four possible goals in a
translation, that they can't all be fullly reached in the same
translation. If one is translating a Broadway or West End musical,
rhythm and scan might even be goal number 2, but Artscroll doesn't
translate musical theatre.

Wait, he's not even talking about the Hebrew at all. He just doesn't
like the English What a waste of our time.

Wait, looking a third time, he's even wrong about his English complaint.
A hard C doesn't change the meter of the phrase. Look at, for example,
at a non-translation:
I believe with a firm fath.
That has the same meter as what he says comes from Artscroll, In part
because there is no requirement of a stop just because of the hard c.
Instead, the end of "with" can be elided Of course miy change means
it's not a translation of the original, but Malcolm seemed not to mind
that when he tried to change complete to perfect.
--

Meir

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

On Thursday, December 25, 2014 12:25:02 AM UTC, googy wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 22:14:32 +0000 (UTC),
>

> I noticed this line last, after all that follows, this doesn't have the
> same meter as the Hebrew does. Nor does perfect mean the same thing as
> complete.
>

It's essentially a synonym. As in "perfect tense".

[cindys]

On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 1:57:28 PM UTC-5, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:
> On 12/24/2014 1:24 PM, cindys wrote:

snip

> >
> > So, in short, no, I don't think this guy is a toll, but I also can't fathom why he's pretending that I made a whole bunch of statements that I never made.
>
> ...because that is what he does. He did it to Fred. He did it at least
> five times to me. And now he is doing it to you. He is a "toll".

-----
I still don't think so. His posts are sort of typical of a new BT (ba'al teshuvah - a previously secular Jew who has now become a torah-observant Jew). New ba'alei teshuvah tend to be quite pedantic, rigid, and very critical of any behaviors endemic to their former secular lifestyle. Sometimes, it's like this with new converts, as well.

I know of one situation where an entire family converted. The parents were the ones who wanted to convert, and the children (who had been perfectly happy being secular non-Jews) weren't given a choice in the matter. One of the ramifications was that someone (the rabbi or someone else - not sure) apparently told the parents that the children had to give away all their superhero toys (I'm not sure what was the reason - maybe that superheroes are a glorification of secular culture or something).

At any rate, the children were totally miserable and resentful. Of course, there are plenty of O families whose children have and play with superhero toys, but the family didn't discover this until much later. When someone told them the children had to give up the superhero toys, they passively went along with it because they didn't realize that the party line isn't necessarily based on halacha and isn't necessarily the reality of what other O Jews are doing.

What I have learned over the course of my life, having lived and experienced a spectrum of different styles of Judaism and different lifestyles is that even within O, things are rarely as rigid as the party line would portray.

For example, the official O position on conversion (as it was always told to me)is that an O rabbi would never even consider allowing a conversion if the would-be convert (usually a woman) were dating or engaged to or even married to a Jew. A BT will often tell you that the O rabbi will insist that the couple break up immediately and advise them that a conversion under such circumstances cannot even be considered because the motivation is wrong.

If it's just a dating situation, this is usually true, but if the couple is already engaged or married, and they have no intention of splitting up under any circumstances, and the non-Jew seems really motivated and sincere, the truth is that O rabbis sometimes will allow the conversion of the non-Jewish partner. I personally know of a number of cases where this has happened. But the official O position (AFAIK)is that a conversion under these circumstances is not allowed. Period.

The position that a person who doesn't accept the 13 Principles will not be allowed to join an O synagogue sort of reminded me of the above. Perhaps this litmus test was articulated by some rabbi somewhere (although I personally have never heard of it before), but the reality is that all kinds of people join O synagogues all the time, and nobody ever asks them about their beliefs as part of the criteria.

That said, it would seem to me that Dean (on the basis of his description of his poor health) is most likely an older gentleman, whereas the typical BT (that I've seen anyway)is in his or her early 20s. So, I don't know what to make of this, but I still don't think he came to SCJM specifically for the purpose of being inflammatory.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Shelly]

On 12/25/2014 11:35 AM, cindys wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 1:57:28 PM UTC-5, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:
>> On 12/24/2014 1:24 PM, cindys wrote:
> snip
>>>
>>> So, in short, no, I don't think this guy is a toll, but I also can't fathom why he's pretending that I made a whole bunch of statements that I never made.
>>
>> ...because that is what he does. He did it to Fred. He did it at least
>> five times to me. And now he is doing it to you. He is a "toll".
> -----
> I still don't think so. His posts are sort of typical of a new BT (ba'al teshuvah - a previously secular Jew who has now become a torah-observant Jew). New ba'alei teshuvah tend to be quite pedantic, rigid, and very critical of any behaviors endemic to their former secular lifestyle. Sometimes, it's like this with new converts, as well.

Like being an ex-smoker?

> I know of one situation where an entire family converted. The parents were the ones who wanted to convert, and the children (who had been perfectly happy being secular non-Jews) weren't given a choice in the matter. One of the ramifications was that someone (the rabbi or someone else - not sure) apparently told the parents that the children had to give away all their superhero toys (I'm not sure what was the reason - maybe that superheroes are a glorification of secular culture or something).
>
> At any rate, the children were totally miserable and resentful. Of course, there are plenty of O families whose children have and play with superhero toys, but the family didn't discover this until much later. When someone told them the children had to give up the superhero toys, they passively went along with it because they didn't realize that the party line isn't necessarily based on halacha and isn't necessarily the reality of what other O Jews are doing.
>
> What I have learned over the course of my life, having lived and experienced a spectrum of different styles of Judaism and different lifestyles is that even within O, things are rarely as rigid as the party line would portray.
>
> For example, the official O position on conversion (as it was always told to me)is that an O rabbi would never even consider allowing a conversion if the would-be convert (usually a woman) were dating or engaged to or even married to a Jew. A BT will often tell you that the O rabbi will insist that the couple break up immediately and advise them that a conversion under such circumstances cannot even be considered because the motivation is wrong.
>
> If it's just a dating situation, this is usually true, but if the couple is already engaged or married, and they have no intention of splitting up under any circumstances, and the non-Jew seems really motivated and sincere, the truth is that O rabbis sometimes will allow the conversion of the non-Jewish partner. I personally know of a number of cases where this has happened. But the official O position (AFAIK)is that a conversion under these circumstances is not allowed. Period.
>
> The position that a person who doesn't accept the 13 Principles will not be allowed to join an O synagogue sort of reminded me of the above. Perhaps this litmus test was articulated by some rabbi somewhere (although I personally have never heard of it before), but the reality is that all kinds of people join O synagogues all the time, and nobody ever asks them about their beliefs as part of the criteria.
>
> That said, it would seem to me that Dean (on the basis of his description of his poor health) is most likely an older gentleman, whereas the typical BT (that I've seen anyway)is in his or her early 20s. So, I don't know what to make of this, but I still don't think he came to SCJM specifically for the purpose of being inflammatory.

Maybe not, but his actions speak rather loudly.

[connco...@gmail.com]

_____


When I came to SCJM to find the answer to a couple of trivia questions,
I saw a bunch of hateful, dishonest anti-Orthodox posts that the moderator let through and which were going unchallenged.

Then I stumbled across a post from Cindy from earlier this year in which Cindy complained about the anti-Orthodox hatred which has taken over SCJM.

I attempted to defend Orthodox to re-establish some balance and honesty here.

But then Cindy posted allegations regarding Orthodox which made Orthodox sound like a bunch of unbeliever hypocrites.
(many of them mouth the 13 Principles without really believing them, they have a hidden gay underground, etc)
Which meant that Cindy was actually contributing to the anti-Orthodox atmoshpere here that she had earlier complained about.

Shelly posts accusations about "complete idiots",
Fred posts accusations that Orthodox follow the lead of Fundamentalist Christians,
Fred brags that he doesn't believe the words when he publicly sings the 13 Principles,
a person in Israel accuses that I am like the Nazis who murdered her relatives,
the moderator is guilty of letting that hateful stuff get posted every day,
yet I am the alleged "troll" here in SCJM?

No wonder the people who were worth talking to all left SCJM a long time ago.
And I am leaving, too.

Dean

[cindys]

On Thursday, December 25, 2014 3:05:23 PM UTC-5, connco...@gmail.com wrote:
snip

>

> But then Cindy posted allegations regarding Orthodox which made Orthodox sound like a bunch of unbeliever hypocrites.

I don't think I did do that, but now that I have seen you allege all kinds of negative interpretations to various posters' words on this group, I have to conclude that the problem is yours, not ours.

Not only do you see the O world as being monolithic, but you see it as being monolithic according to your own narrow interpretation of what it means to be "Orthodox." You have been corrected on this point by several rightwing Orthodox posters on this group.

I understand that you would like to believe that the 13 Principles are a litmus test that every person who calls himself "Orthodox" believes without question. I understand that you have created a scenario where O rabbis question people about their beliefs and then exclude some people from the minyan or from shul membership if the person doesn't answer a certain way. And I understand that you would like to believe that every person who labels himself Orthodox believes 100% all of the things that you believe or that Orthodox rabbis and synagogues operate exactly according to Hoyle. But this is not reality, and you're angry because I had the audacity to tell the truth.

If you expect every person you know to meet your exacting expectations of what that person should be or how he should behave or what he should believe on every level, you are going to be sadly disappointed every time.

There could be 1000 Orthodox posters on this group, and I daresay not a single one of them would posit that every single member of every O shul publicly and privately believes "with perfect faith" in Rambam's 13 Principles, and the fact that p. 138 of the Artscroll siddur says "this is the core of Jewish belief" doesn't make it so. As another poster pointed out, Artscroll is just a publishing company.

Human beings are not black and white but rather made up of various shades of gray, and if you write off everybody who can't meet your exacting expectations then you are destined to end up alone :-(
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Giorgies E Kepipesiom]

On Thursday, December 25, 2014 3:05:23 PM UTC-5, connco...@gmail.com wrote:
>

> No wonder the people who were worth talking to all left SCJM a long time ago.
> And I am leaving, too.

Noach, you already left a long time ago. You recently returned for a short while, and now you leave again. Sei Gesint.

GEK
whishing good Shabbos to all

[cindys]

On Thursday, December 25, 2014 7:15:42 PM UTC-5, Giorgies E Kepipesiom wrote:
> On Thursday, December 25, 2014 3:05:23 PM UTC-5, connco...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > No wonder the people who were worth talking to all left SCJM a long time ago.
> > And I am leaving, too.
>
> Noach, you already left a long time ago. You recently returned for a short while, and now you leave again. Sei Gesint.

-----
It's not Noach. For one thing, this man has stated that he is quite ill (and with an illness that would rarely be seen in a young person), whereas Noach would be in his 30s now. I can't imagine that someone in his 30s would portray himself as being 40 years old than is and claim to have a life-threatening illness just to throw other people off the track. Secondly, Noach was a Satmar (although I do understand that people can change their affiliations).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Yisroel Markov]

On Fri, 26 Dec 2014 00:15:54 +0000 (UTC), Giorgies E Kepipesiom
<kepip...@hotmail.com> said:

>On Thursday, December 25, 2014 3:05:23 PM UTC-5, connco...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> No wonder the people who were worth talking to all left SCJM a long time ago.
>> And I am leaving, too.
>
>Noach, you already left a long time ago. You recently returned for a short while, and now you leave again. Sei Gesint.

The similarities are there, but I think Noach showed signs of progress
when he left. What makes you posit the identity?
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand

[mm]

On Thu, 25 Dec 2014 05:16:57 +0000 (UTC), malcolm...@btinternet.com
wrote:

It is NOT ESSENTIALLY a synonym. (He's comparing *complete* faith with
*perfect* faith, and claiming the words are essentially synonymous.)
If you want a synonymous word, use the same word.

> As in "perfect tense".

We're not discussing grammar.


--

Meir