After an interesting e-mail correpondance, I wanted to share the following guest post:
After several years of a deepening interest in Chassidus and of living in a community where most people daven Nusach Sefard, I have long meant to change my minhagim.Picture courtesy of Tully Filmus. Click here to get Dixie Yid in your e-mail Inbox or here to subscribe in Google Reader.
The nusach and the minhagim of Ashkenaz have been both uncomfortable and more comfortable for me. Uncomfortable because as I have learned more Chassidus and lived for several years in a place where the nusach and minhagim of Sefard are the norm, I identify with the nusach and the minhagim of Sefard as being more appropriate for me. And this is true for social reasons as well, because keeping minhagei Ashkenaz puts me in a position where I am performing different minhagim than those around me.
However, the minhagim of Ashkenaz are also more comfortable to me for several reasons. The first is that Ashkenaz was the way I have done it from the time I became religious about 15 years ago, so I am more familiar and comfortable with it. I can easily bentch or daven in Nusach Ashkenaz by heart (notwithstanding the fact this this is not necessarily a good thing...). The other thing I like better about Ashkenaz is that virtually everything in davening is shorter. There are no Korbanos before mincha, no Shir Hama'alos before Ma'ariv, no extra paragraphs in P'sukei D'Zimra, no vidui before Tachanun, and no Ein Keilokeinu/Ketores after Ashrei/U'va'l'tziyon.
Knowing all of this I was very hesitant to switch to the minhagim and Nusach of Sefard. Once one goes there, there's no going back. It's a big commitment and I did not want to make that change unless I knew that I could stick with it.
Before going further, I should mention that I discussed this issue with my Rav about three years ago, and while not advising me to make the change, he certainly gave me permission to do so and gave me some guidance about how to handle certain practical and halachic issues relating to the big switcheroo. So there was no issue for me as to whether there was any technical issur in making that change.
But the main reason I was hesitant to make the change had to do with the fact that the importance of my external minhagim pales in comparison to the importance of my internal level in ruchnius, in the level and character of my deveikus with Hashem. I actually felt completely unworthy of taking on a "holier" type of minhag-set when I knew about myself that I was clearly not holding there. It would have felt fake and phoney to take on a Chassidish set of minhagim if my inner life was so far from what I felt Nusach Sefard minhagim stand for.
For instance, I did not come to minyan on time generally, and I thought that it would be quite absurd to trade a Nusach Ashkenaz P'sukei D'Zimra that I (mostly) wasn't saying for a Nusach Sefard Psukei D'Zimra which I also (mostly) wouldn't say.
And generally, I just felt that I was not "on the level" to keep those "holier" minhagim. So my thinking, over several years, was that after I continued learning and growing for a while, and felt like I could keep those minhagim with a feeling of consistency and when I had the "moral standing" to do so, then I would make the change.
But as I thought about this issue over Yom Kippur, I once again asked myself the same questions about why I didn't change over already, and I gave myself the same answers I always gave myself, which I mentioned above. And then I began to see the absurdity of my situation. Part of this had to do with reading the following story about Rav Saadia Gaon in my (Nusach Ashkenaz) Artscroll Machzor (p. XVII):Rav Saadiah Gaon once told a talmid the following story when asked why he was constantly doing teshuva: He once traveled to an inn, where he was not recognized by the innkeeper as the great Saadia Gaon, but was treated respectfully as any guest would have been treated. After observing the throngs coming to see the Rav the next morning, the inkeeper came to Saadia Gaon in tears, asking his forgiveness. The Rav replied that he had done nothing wrong. But the innkeeper responded that although that may be true, if he had only known who his guest was, he still would have treated him differently. The Gaon explained the mashal to his student, that he too felt obligated to appologize for his spiritual level the day before. Even though he may not have done any technical sins the previous day, his understanding and level in avodas Hashem is higher today than it was yestereday. Therefore, he must do teshuva every day for how low his level in avodas Hashem was the day before. (DY: For more on this topic, see here.)I was bothered after reading this story. Not only am I not growing "michayil el chayil" as time goes on, I am going in the opposite direction! I am lower now than I was when I first became religious (relative to who I should be now based on my experience and knowledge)! When will I get to the basic point every Jew should be at where he is becoming a better person, year after year, at least by a little bit!?
Old age is supposed to be the highest point in life, where I will reach the apex of my life in terms of ruchnius and Torah knowlege. But how do I think that I will ever get to that point if I am constantly regressing every year?! I've been religious for over 15 years now... How long exactly do I plan to procrastinate actually growing as a Jew??? Will I always say to myself that I may not be who I should be now, but one day I will be? Well when exactly will that "one day" come??? Dai! It's enough procrastinating already!
Since this thought process started by asking myself (again) why I wasn't yet switching to minhag Sefard, I went back to that question. Why won't I switch to Nusach Sefard? Because I'm waiting to be on the level to be "worthy" of taking on those minhagim. Well, "im lo achshav, eimasai?!" "If not now, when?" I'm certainly not getting any younger!
So I made the following cheshbon. Every year I have to take on some new thing. So for this year, let me make some change that will bring me at least one step closer to where I was 15 years ago and IY"H one day I can surpass that point and become a real Jew. So this year my kabala will be to change my minhagim to Nusach Sefard and to come to davening on time or early so that I will at least have enough time to sayh the longer davening properly (a big kabala, I know).
My cheshbon was that these two changes would have the following (more penimius'dik) effects:So I davened Ma'ariv Motza'ae Yom Kippur Nusach Sefard. The next day I began wearing a gartle and even brought my tefilin to a sofer during my lunch break to have the retzuah in the tefilin shel yad changed so that I could "twist outward." And, among other things, on Sukkos I will now do the "right, left, front, up, down, back" na'anuim. Etc. Etc.
- At least at the beginning, the unfamiliarity of the text will force me to read from the sidur, at least for a few months, which will make me more attentive to the words and meaning of the davening that I am saying
- It's important to come on davening in general. The tzura of a real Jew is one who comes on time to davening. It's bizyonos and it's just not tzuras HaYid to run into davening late almost every day, skipping huge portions of the sidur, etc.
- The desire not to feel fake and phoney about keeping more Chassidish minhagim should motivate me to be more medakdeik in halacha and to do what's more appropriate in general.
- Even though thinking about Hashem, hashgacha pratis, working on subtle ta'avos, etc. are the goal of life, a life of real avodas Hashem can only exist b'emes, in the context of a real halachic life. Without that kli, a life of high falutin' Chassidus and hisbonenus about Hashem in the world is just a "binyan ha'poreiach b'avir," a "tree without roots."
Im Yirtzeh Hashem, all of these changes should be l'toeles. They should help bring me, as means toward an end, closer to the point when I will be a better Jew next Yom Kippur than I was this past Yom Kippur.
-The Changer
19 comments:
This post is sad. And offensive too.
What basically happened is that the changer moved to a Sfard/Hassidic community, and, SURPRISE, as time went by, being part of a small minority there, began feeling less and less comfortable following the derech of Ashkenaz. Naturally, being in a Sfard/Hassidic area, he would be bombarded with stories and arguments for the Sfard/Hassidic way (without getting the Ashkenazic POV), and, naturally, the Rabbi there would permit him to change.
Instead of being the proverbial live fish, swimming against the stream, he chose to allow himself to go along with the local stream and abandon the ancient, deep and holy way of Ashkenaz.
The changer means well presumably, but seemingly lacks the knowledge to appreciate the deep roots and holiness of the way of Ashkenaz, viewing it superficially as being 'less holy' (I'm sure Rashi, the Rama, the Rosh, Maharam miRotenberg, Maharil, Chasam Sofer, Vilna Gaon, etc., etc., are happy to know that you consider the way they followed 'less holy'), and gradually slides away from it, eventually jettisoning it like an old piece of clothing. Instead of treating it like the priceless heirloom it is, passed down over many centuries, that maybe needs some repolishing and restoration to remove some accumulated dust and grime and let its beauty shine through, he sees it as an older, inferior, and worn out appliance that must make way for the newer, 'more advanced', shiny nusach Sfard/Hassidic way.
It is of course offensive too to label Sfard as holier, even if the first time it was mentioned it was done as 'holier'.
This blog posts this, not only as an innocuous human interest story, but also as part of its campaign to encourage such defections from the ancient and beautiful heritage of Ashkenaz. Again, presumably well-meaning, but sad and tragic nonetheless, when Yidden abandon an ancient holy heritage.
Ashkenazic Jew,
I did make clear that I made the change because I identifid "the minhagim of Sefard as being more appropriate *for me.* ".
I would also disagree that our gracious host is engaged in a "campaign to encourage such defections from the ancient and beautiful heritage of Ashkenaz." While he does write about and promote Chassidus, I haven't read much about chaning minhagim. Chassidus is not, b'ikar, what set of minhagim one keeps or what one's levush is. It's about a deeper relationship with Hashehm, which is equally applicable to anyone regardless of their minhagim. In fact, I have heard that many people who become Breslover Chassidim continue davening Ashkenaz or Sefardi, depending on their background.
Ah gut Moed!
Ashkenazic Jew: Did you miss this segment: "Before going further, I should mention that I discussed this issue with my Rav about three years ago, and while not advising me to make the change, he certainly gave me permission to do so and gave me some guidance about how to handle certain practical and halachic issues relating to the big switcheroo. So there was no issue for me as to whether there was any technical issur in making that change."
This is not at all the same thing as changing from one's family minhag, since he is a Baal Teshuva. So halachically there is no problem here at all--except perhaps hataras nedarim and even that is not relevant according to very many great poskim if the person in question did hataras nedarim on Erev Rosh Hashanah. Although we cannot rely on this for outright nedarim, Rav Yosef Chaim Sonenfeld, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, and ylt"a Rav Yosef Shalom Eliyashev, all say that one can rely on this for nidrei mitzvah which are not b'lashon neder and are like a neder from the posuk.
Of course Ashkenazic custom is very deep indeed, but the Baal Shem Tov did make changes and this is certainly a valid path. Even those who say that one may no longer change over from Ashkenaz to Sefard, admit that one whose ancestors changed need not change back despite the depth of Ashkenazic custom. Sefard is also very holy.
When the Chida was asked the difference he explained that Ahskenazic custom leans more to din while Sefard to Chesed. Both are definitely valid.
There can be some positive value in using the minhag of the community where one has chosen to live and affiliate. Viewed properly, this is more a matter of practicality and solidarity than it is a assertion that the newly adopted minhag is intrinsically superior.
you didn't have to change the strap of your tefilin to feel chassidish. Gerer Hassidim (the biggest, i think, chassidus in the world) put tefilin shel yad inward like the standard ashkenazi custom (in the same time Gerrer daven sfard).
It seems that the changer wanted to integrate into the community where he felt comfortable. So kalakavod for his honesty and changing. As a BT he finally found a place to call home.
I empathize with the Changer although I don't feel comfortable with his judgment of which nusach is "holier".
Here's why: When my grandfather came to America in the 1920's he changed to ashkenaz minhagim. I never asked him why he did this, but I would guess that he did it because at that time there were few if any chassidim in the U.S. Almost all shuls davened nusach ashkenaz, and almost if not everybody followed ashkenaz minhagim.
My father, who was born in America was therefore born into ashkenaz minhagim.
I never researched this but there may be a halachic requirement to follow minhag hamakom if you join a community whose minhagim differ from yours. It's a shaila for sure.
farsy,
Thanks for the he'ora. I didn't know Gerer Chassidim did this but by switching, I'm not looking to pick and choose minhagim. I'm trying, as best as possible, to stick with a generally cohesive set of minhagim (which just happens to be different set of minhagim than my previous cohesive set of minhagim). And that set would be the version of Nusach Sefard minhagim my Shul keeps/the most mainstream version of Nusach Sefard minhagim.
R' Tokayer,
Indeed as Anonymous Chosid said above, there are more "heterim" to switch if that was one's original minhag. And I guess you're saying sticking with my community is a better reason than making "value judgments" about the relative holiness of the minhagim. I didn't see this as a true case of where halacha requires one to change his minhagim because of minhag hamakom. There is enough of a significant minhority within the Shul that still davens Ashkenaz, plus the fact that a slim majority of people in the general area probably keep minhag Ashkenaz mean to me that this is not a real case where changing to a Sefard minhag because it's minhag hamakom would be required.
Changer : "I did make clear that I made the change because I identifid "the minhagim of Sefard as being more appropriate *for me.* "
Sorry, but your post was a lot more than saying that you changed because of your own comfort. You clearly stated your belief that 'Sfard' (Hassidic - not real Sefarad, which is kept by Sefaradim) is higher and that the change would be moving higher, in your belief.
" Chassidus is not, b'ikar, what set of minhagim one keeps or what one's levush is. It's about a deeper relationship with Hashehm, which is equally applicable to anyone regardless of their minhagim. In fact, I have heard that many people who become Breslover Chassidim continue davening Ashkenaz.."
So why then did you change?
Anonymous Chosid: "This is not at all the same thing as changing from one's family minhag, since he is a Baal Teshuva."
Baalei teshuvoh have family minhogim. They can inquire if their grandfather or great grandfather was Hassidic or a Litvak. I don't see the changer addressing that.
The fact is that this post is disturbing because the changer is acting based on his comparing a mitzvas anoshim melumodoh (rote) version of Ashkenaz, which he rightfully finds lacking, with a romanticized and idealized version of Sfard (which does not reflect the reality of most Sfard daveners, by the way). If you want to be fair you have to either compare the masses of rote daveners of each camp to each other (Ashkenaz to Sfard in this case) or compare the baalei madreigah (the spiritually accomplished spiritual strivers and seekers and gedolim) of each camp to each other. When you take the lowest (rote) type of Ashkenaz davener and compare him with a spiritual striver davening another nusach, you are not being fair.
Basically, you have bought into the propaganda that 'Sfard' is more spiritual, the nusach for the spiritually minded seeker, and Ashkenaz is for the rote prayer.
Did you ever study perhaps the reasons for Ashkenaz minhogim and way of prayer, in depth, over years like you did with Sfard/Hassidism? It seems not. So you made your decision with a lack of knowledge. Yet you feel confident that you did the right thing, and are parroting the propaganda that Sfard is 'holier', even if you backtracked a bit after I posted my earlier critique.
I salute you for trying to go to a higher level, and realize that it is likely that you have not been exposed to teachings showing the greatness, beauty and holiness of the Ashkenaz way, which sometimes are less readily available than Hassidic teachings. However, it is still sad, and I want the public out there to know that the matter is not as simple as it was portrayed.
P.S. You can always come back to Ashkenaz. Maybe some day you will realize that going through more pages doesn't necessarily mean a better davening. Sometimes less is more, as we are taught in the beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Davening is a matter of quality and kavannah, not quantity of pages gone through.
The Amshinover Rebbe, Shlita always answers questions according to the personal situaion of the asker, but in this case the Rebbe seems to have made a general statement.I went to the Amshinover Rebbe, Shlita 3 years ago to ask about changing nusach. The Rebbe was very clear that it is "mutar to change from Nusach Ashkenaz to Nusach Sfard, BUT it is not mutar to switch from Nusach Sfard to Nusach Ashkenaz."
Ashkenazic Jew: I made two points which you did not address. Perhaps I need to explain them better.
1) There is an enormous machlokes whether one may switch from Ashkenaz to Sefard but not vice versa (like the Baal Shem Tov and hundreds of communities did,) or the opposite: since Ashkenaz was the original nusach one may go back to Ashkenaz but not to Sefard (and the Baal Shem Tov etc was an exception for an unknown reason according to many contemporary poskim who hold that chasidim need not switch back although they may if they like.)
Now the Tanya states that Sefard is a nusach hakolel, but the Chasam Sofer rejects this very powerfully. And the Divrei Chaim defends the Tanya / Baal Shem Tov.
And so it goes, each camp has many poskim and is definitely halachically acceptable, so why can't Changer rely on his Rav, who rely on these poskim.
There are many points which can be made for either side, but that make for a huge comment (more like a post in and of itself.) One salient point made by the Maharshag, is that two of the Rebbe's of the Chasam Sofer himself, the Haflah, and Rav Nosson Adler, switched over themselves from Ashkenaz to Sefard, as the Chasam Sofer himself records.
Another important point is that we find that Sefard is a nusach hakolel in the Arizal himself (at least according to the Mishnas Chasidim.)
Yet as I wrote this is a huge discussion, the resolution of which is that each side has a lot to rely on.
So point 1) Why can't Changer follow his Rav?
2) Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurebach, and other great poskim, ruled that if a Baal Teshuvah has a reason to follow a different nusach from his ancestors, i.s. he feels connected or it is his Rebbe's nusach, he may follow a different nusach than his families nusach.
As far as having davened Ashkenaz initially, this does not constitute an outright neder and if Changer did hataras nedarim each year since them, he can still change. (Happy to provide sources on request by the way.)
So it seems that Changer's Rav is correct for yet another reason.
And even Rav Moshe who holds like the Chasam Sofer, also holds that one who davens with a different nusach should say that nusach even in what he davens b'lachash.
Now we have a third halachic reason why Changer's Rav is correct. He davens in this type of minyan so most of the problem is irrelevant. Surely he can rely on Rav Moshe in this inyan.
I have studied some sources regarding the depth of Ashkenaz, AND Sefard. May I ask if you have studied the sources about the depth of Nusach Sefard? If so, what sources?
If not, why discuss what you are uniformed about?
I never said (or meant) that Ashkenaz is lower or that Sefard is higher, (besides the quote of the Tanya which doesn't mean Sefard is higher than Ashkenaz. Merely that it includes everyone for whatever reason; perhaps because we know the kavanos of the Arizal etc, only regarding Sefard. Or some other reason.)
Hashem should help us force ourselves to daven b'kavanah whatever nusach we may use, as symbolized by beating the lip like aravos on the ground.
Perhaps it's politically incorrect to say what everyone else is tiptoeing around - the truth often is not pc. The nusach of the Arizal is on a higher level than previous nuschaos. It's no raya that the rishonim didn't use it. It was meant to be revealed for the doros that need it. Do you turn on the heater in August or only when it gets cold? So too when the doros got "cold" enough in their davening a higher nusach was revealed to us, followed a couple generations later by the revelation of chassidus.
Anonymous Chosid: "I have studied some sources regarding the depth of Ashkenaz, AND Sefard. May I ask if you have studied the sources about the depth of Nusach Sefard? If so, what sources?"
I have studied various sources. How about if you first list what you studied before asking someone else to do same?
Also, to clarify, I started by taking the poster to task for saying that Sfard was higher, not you.
With all the discussion here, one thing comes to mind. We have a klal (general rule) that 'kol hamishaneh, yado al hatachtonah'.
I wonder what you say to Menashe, by the way. He says some interesting things.
G-d forbid to call the nusach of the holy arizal a shinui. This is the nusach that was given along with the luchos to moshe rabbeinu at har sinai and was revealed to the masses only in the last few centuries.
To clarify my earlier point. To say that the rishonim didn't use this nusach so we also shouldn't is akin to saying that we don't need to turn on the heat or wear heavier clothing in the winter months because in august it was unnecessary.
Menashe :
Thanks for posting. Your posts make the contrast between the Ashkenazic and Hassidic views much more stark and apparent.
"G-d forbid to call the nusach of the holy arizal a shinui. This is the nusach that was given along with the luchos to moshe rabbeinu at har sinai and was revealed to the masses only in the last few centuries."
Can you give a written Hassidic source for your assertion that "it was given at Har Sinai"?
"To say that the rishonim didn't use this nusach so we also shouldn't is akin to saying that we don't need to turn on the heat or wear heavier clothing in the winter months because in august it was unnecessary."
Cute, but people that made other religious changes that you don't agree with could say the same thing. So its not so simple.
This is the mesorah of the Jewish people with regards to the kabbalah of the Ari. If you want a written source I refer you to Shaar Hakolel of R' Avrohom Dovid Lavut.
As a side note, nobody argues with the Ari. All the litvishe geonim, including the GRA learned the kabalah of the Ari. The only difference was how to apply his teachings to the masses.
I highly doubt it your second assertion. If the "change" is in the framework of Torah and halacha then it should certainly be considered. Otherwise not.
Your contrast between Ashkenazic and Hassidic is either ignorant or plain silly. The Chasidic movement originated among ashkenazim and has only very recently begun to expand to the sefardi world. I assume you meant misnagdish or litvish.
Ashkenazic Jew: Sorry a little slow to respond.
On nusach Ashkenaz specifically I have studied the Rokeach's very comprehensive explanation, the wondrous Siddur of the Gra and the Yesod V'Shoresh Ha'avodah. (By the way, there are not so many differences between the nuschaos as one who reads these comments would likely figure.)
I didn't mean that you should list what you have seen, merely that if you had learned about both nuschaos in depth, you would likely not feel so against the change made by Chasidus, since while Ashkenaz is very holy, so is Sefard.
As Menashe pointed out, no one genuine really has a problem with the Arizal or his nusach. And as I wrote earlier, even some very great Ashkenazim "changed over."
The Chasam Sofer wouldn't be phased by this at all, but it shows at least that both nuschaos are absolutely valid (even though there is a halachic dispute whether one may change.)
I do not agree with Menashe's take on Sefard being holy, but this is a very old question. I know that Chabad and many other Chasidic traditions, view Sefard as holier. On the other hand, Rebbe Nachman of Breslov said that there is no need to change over from Ashkenaz to Sefard since Ashkenaz is also a great nusach (although he said clearly that one is certainly not required to change back.) The Mishnas Chasidim says the same (or maybe even stronger that one must not change to either side; depends how you learn it.)
I did not get the impression from the piece that Changer holds that Sefard is holier. I wonder why it struck you that way. Perhaps you have been speaking with too many people who hold that shittah and automatically assumed Chager feels the same way. Maybe if you reread the article with the understanding that both nuschaos are deep and holy, yet some people have a personal need to change it won't seem "offensive and sad." Especially since he says clearly that he consulted with a competent Rav.
I don't see what was offensive or sad about it at all.
And in all honesty if someone were to write the same article about a person who switched from Sefard to Ashkenaz (I know quite a few of these by the way,) I would feel exactly the same way, and would have written my comment defending his change as well (though I would have written the proofs of the Chasam Sofer instead of his detractors. All of the proofs ultimately have an answer by the way.)
as a sceptic who reads these posts one after the other, i easily discerned that the ashkenasic jew prefers to stick to reason and what is written, whereas the rest, mostly in defence if the changer use the "spiritual" and reggesh approach. a discussion like this will probably never come to an end, just like litvikkes and chassidim survived the main years of confrontation, and sticked to their opionions in a "elu va elu divrei elokim chayim" armistice. is there anyone who wishes to guess who i side with from my statement above?
Yes, you have made it abundantly clear.
I doubt, however, that the poskim who permit and encourage people to change to the nusach hakolel, Nusach Sefard/AR"I, fail to base their position on "reason and what is written."
It is also interesting that you feel that ruchnius and regesh are foreign to a Jew's proper decision making process. It's an assumption which might be worthy of reconsideration.
Post a Comment