Um, I'm kinda confused. The message of these kids seems to differ from the message of your book. I don't remember the exact pages (I read the book right when it came out) but I remember you saying that being Chareidi is not related to your kippa or whether or not you wear t'cheiles. It means accepting the values listed on page 217. Now suddenly, you are promoting (and saying this was the intent of the book all along) the definiton of chareidi alluded to when you say "there's chareidi and there's chareidi" or the definition used by your bekeshe laden friend on page 218. The guys at mekaz ha'rav are chareidi according to your definition but not according to the definition of the second definition.I'm confused.
I will certainly do my best to clear up the confusion. I will try to make this as simple as I can:
The message of my book is that all Jews are obligated to live up to Vayikra 26:3 which, according to Rashi and Toras Kohanim means "keeping the mitzvos and toiling in Torah study." If we do so, things will be pretty good and we will merit the blessings of the following 10 pasukim. If we do not, we are in for a very rough ride (such as the following 33 pasukim).
The message of the autistics is that all Jews are obligated to live up to Vayikra 26:3 which, according to Rashi and Toras Kohanim means "keeping the mitzvos and toiling in Torah study." If we do so, things will be pretty good and we will merit the blessings of the following 10 pasukim. If we do not, we are in for a very rough ride (such as the following 33 pasukim).
Don't you love Copy /Paste?
Are we together on this to this point?
Now, I chose to call anybody who lives up to Vayikra 26:3 chareidi because I believe that this is what Yeshaya HaNavi had in mind.
As such, anyone who does so is chareidi no matter which Yeshiva he learns in.
Neither I nor the autistics are interested in what type of kippa one wears or whether they wear t'cheles (the page that you refer to is 67).
As much as I focus on Vayikra 26:3 there is another focus on Vayikra 19:2 which I mention briefly on page 95 but do not go into detail. Still it is every bit a part of the 1A7B credo. This is the part about Kedoshim Tihiyu which Rashi explains as "havu perushim min haarayos..." and the Ramban explains as not being a "naval b'rshus haTorah". I consider Kedoshim Tihiyu as an intrinsic part of Im Bechukosai Telechu so the same ultimatum (we keep it - good; we flout it- bad news...) applies.
The autistics seem to take an extremely hard-lined view of Kedoshim Tihiyu. Still, it is a reflection of the attitudes of chazal. Since I am trying to be as inclusive as I can with my definition, I am not actively promoting such a hard-line view. I am having enough trouble selling ameilus b'Torah so I leave it to them to push the strict Kedoshim Tihiyu. The autistics are not trying to be overly inclusive in their "One Above" list so they can get away with it.
Bottom line is: We are drawing our water from the same well.
I hope I have cleared up some of the confusion but, truth be told, I am a bit confused myself. I am not sure in what way I was "suddenly" promoting another definiton. Perhaps you can clear that up for me.
In any case, if you need more clarification - you know where to find me.