Proof that Women are Better than Men

Home Forums Bais Medrash Proof that Women are Better than Men

Viewing 45 posts - 1 through 45 (of 45 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #615539
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    The Gemara (Sukkah 29a) says: ???? ????? ?? ???????

    ???? is ???, as per Rashi.

    In the High Holiday liturgy, we say:

    ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????

    So the syllogism would look like this:

    1. ??? is not to be brought into the sukkah

    2. ??? is ????

    3. Ergo, ??? is not to be brought into the sukkah

    But if a person is exempt from sukkah by the very nature of being ????, why do we need the mishnah on 28a to tell us: ???? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?? ??????

    Obviously, women are not ???? and they therefore need a separate exemption. If men are ???? and women are not, women are clearly better.

    (There are alternative explanations that one could give, e.g. that women are also ???? but that’s not a p’tur – it’s just an issur to bring in ??? whereas the mishnah is giving an actual p’tur. One could ??????? also be mechalek between different types of ???. But the pashtus is as I said. And before everyone thinks I’m crazy, in the sefer ????? ?? ??? (p. 125) the following is quoted about ?’ ??? ?????:

    ?????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ?? ?? ???? ??? ?? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ???

    He gives a different answer though.)

    #1092354
    Joseph
    Participant

    If I started a serious thread entitled “Proof that men are better than women” with real proofs from the Torah and Chazal that breached every concept of political correctness but nevertheless was almost unassailable from a Torah hashkafic viewpoint that ignored all the modern apologetics trying to explain away the so many open pesukim in Tanach, mishnas, gemoras and rishonim, would the CR go into an uproar? (Or is the more likely probability that the thread would be rejected?)

    #1092355
    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    paa,

    an adam is only compared to a cheres (pottery) when he’s dead he call cheres hanishbar when alive he’s an adam

    #1092356
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Patur

    Ironically some Chasidim hold Women arent allowed in the Sukkah. (I believe Munkatch is noheg like this, though I could be wrong on that point.)

    #1092357
    FriendInFlatbush
    Participant

    Patur

    I understand that women are better than men, but the fact that children are also specifically excluded from the sukkah ruins your argument. Are there not male children? And if there are but they have a different ?????? until when they become adults, what transformation happens?

    #1092358
    sm29
    Participant

    Fun discussion for us, but some people take it too seriously.

    What’s sad is that some people out there don’t understand that you can have different instructions and still be both important and equal. If you give a student more help than another student, is the first one more important? No, they are both important. The first one needs more than the other. That’s what people should understand, men spiritually need more mitzvos than women, but they are both important

    #1092360
    owl
    Participant

    Shmuel 1:1 And Chana prayed upon her heart.

    #1092363
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    FriendInFlatbush:

    See

    http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/are-women-reallyjewish/page/4#post-550211

    where I wrote that unmarried men are actually women.

    #1092364
    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    so paa, if unmarried men are women then it would make them chayuv in sukkak, right?

    #1092365
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    coffee addict:

    Presumably. By the way, I didn’t get what you were saying in your first comment. Mind rephrasing?

    #1092366
    DaMoshe
    Participant

    We should start a Purim Torah thread.

    Your premise is flawed. The davening says it’s a mashul. It’s not saying a man is like cheres, it’s saying it’s a similar concept.

    #1092367
    FriendInFlatbush
    Participant

    PAA

    Just because they are not ‘adom’ for not being married and for not being landowners, it does not make them women. Maybe they are not men and are instead ghosts, vampires, spirits, or ghouls.

    #1092368
    apushatayid
    Participant

    thats why we dont sit in the succah when it rains. as cheres we will fall apart. although I dont know why we would need a ptur of mitztaer when it rains if we have the more general ptur of sakanna, of dissolving in the rain. perhaps the seforim discuss this.

    #1092369
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    FriendInFlatbush:

    To answer your question here you don’t need to accept my pshat over there that unmarried men are women; you can just go with what the Gemara

    says – ???? ???. Regardless of what they are, we know that they are not ???. Hence, ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? would not apply to an unmarried man.

    #1092370
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    Damoshe:

    This is not Purim Torah. I quoted a real sefer. Man is a similar concept to cheres – they are both a bizayon to bring into a sukkah.

    #1092371
    owl
    Participant

    You don’t believe for a minute that women are better than men. If you did, you wouldn’t be shooting your mouth off. You’d say, I’m inferior, I’ll stay quiet.

    Most of the men who carry on about the alleged superiority of women are baalei gaavah. Their thinking in terms of superiority and inferiority is due to their thinking that they are superior. They know it’s wrong so they try to compensate with what really is condescension of women.

    #1092372
    apushatayid
    Participant

    So THATS why women are always shooting off their mouth. It comes from a position of superiority. I always knew I could count on the coffee room to teach me something new every day.

    #1092373
    owl
    Participant

    –apushatayid–

    thank you for the example of a man shooting his mouth off

    #1092374
    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    By the way, I didn’t get what you were saying in your first comment. Mind rephrasing?

    sure

    on yom kippur we say a person is like pottery, however that’s only after he’s dead (broken pottery) heKs never compared to unbroken pottery

    so bthe similarity to pottery only starts after death

    #1092375
    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    so in essence one learns out that a meis cant be brought into a sukkah

    #1092376
    apushatayid
    Participant

    How old are you? The fruit punch room is down the hall.

    #1092377
    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    You need the Mishna for before ???? ???.

    #1092378
    FriendInFlatbush
    Participant

    PAA

    You still haven’t explained to me how an unmarried male child fits the description. He’s not a man, because he’s not married. Yet, he still needed to be specifically excluded from the Mishnah. So you basically used circular reasoning to tell me that my issue with women doesn’t apply, because we aren’t talking about that.

    What about the male children being explicitly mentioned in the Mishnah about sukkah? Clearly, according to your reasoning, they too are not ????.

    #1092379
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    coffee addict:

    I think it is comparing a live man to broken pottery.

    #1092380
    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    FriendInFlatbush, I think you lost the sequence.

    #1092381
    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    This statement, that every man is a Cheress, is going according the Shita that ???? ??? ???? ??”?, because really it says of the Talmid Chacham who borrows money that he is a Cheress.

    #1092382
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    FriendInFlatbush:

    I thought I answered your question but maybe I’m not understanding it. I’ll try again:

    You seem to be asking that my whole proof that a woman is not ???? is based on the fact that the mishnah mentions a separate p’tur for women, yet the mishnah also mentions a separate p’tur for male children. My answer to that is that you are correct, male children are not ????, being that the liturgy says that ??? is ???? and as per the gemara in Yevamos, unmarried men are not ???.

    #1092383
    Avram in MD
    Participant

    Patur Aval Assur,

    My answer to that is that you are correct, male children are not ????, being that the liturgy says that ??? is ???? and as per the gemara in Yevamos, unmarried men are not ???.

    So that would mean, according to your OP logic, that unmarried men are better than married men. And what is the difference between a married man and an unmarried man? Why, what a horrible thing to say about women, Patur Aval Assur!! 🙂

    #1092384
    apushatayid
    Participant

    “unmarried men are not ???.”

    in light of this pshat, how are we to understand the passuk “adam ki yamus baohel” both the pashut pshat as well as the drashos on the passuk.

    #1092385
    owl
    Participant

    The only proof is that a man started this foolish thread. Maybe we should say women are better than man.

    #1092386
    Avram in MD
    Participant

    owl,

    The only proof is that a man started this foolish thread.

    1. Are we definitely sure that Patur Aval Assur is a man?

    2. If this thread is so foolish, why are you taking it so seriously?

    #1092387
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    Haleivi:

    Cute. But now that you mention it, we can use a similar thing to answer the question that FriendInFlatbush didn’t ask but is similar to what he did ask. The mishnah in Sukkah also says that an ??? is patur. Which should disprove my whole proof. So we have to bring in the Gemara in Sanhedrin (58b):

    ???? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ?? ???? ???

    So we see that an ??? can change into an ???, and once he is no longer an ??? he is no longer ???? and therefore needs the separate p’tur.

    #1092388
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    So that would mean, according to your OP logic, that unmarried men are better than married men. And what is the difference between a married man and an unmarried man? Why, what a horrible thing to say about women, Patur Aval Assur!! 🙂

    Both men and women start out as non-???. But you can’t have a marriage like that. Someone needs to be the ???. So upon marrying, men become ???. It’s nothing horrible about women; ?????, the men become ??? only because the women are better than them.

    #1092389
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant
    #1092390
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    in light of this pshat, how are we to understand the passuk “adam ki yamus baohel” both the pashut pshat as well as the drashos on the passuk.

    That might be a kashya on the Gemara in Yevamos, but it is not affected by my chiddush over here.

    #1092391
    FriendInFlatbush
    Participant

    ??? ???? ????? ????

    #1092392
    👑RebYidd23
    Participant

    Was this thread started by a man, woman, ghost, vampire, spirit, or ghoul?

    #1092393
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    Am I ghoulie or ghostie or wee student beastie?

    #1092394
    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant
    #1092395
    Wisey
    Participant

    He is also compared to Chatzir Yavesh (dead grass) so he is kosher as schach. This way he can at least lie on top of the sukkah for the women inside to get schar. (Pottery though is passel schach so I think he must lie there until Eliyahu comes to resolve whether he is kosher or not.)

    #1239950
    👑RebYidd23
    Participant

    I think it’s a shame that 😉 🙂 🙁 but ????.

    #1239973
    Lilmod Ulelamaid
    Participant

    What?

    #1240959
    👑RebYidd23
    Participant

    We can use symbols such as 😈, 👱🏿‍, 🐈, 🇺🇸, 🦈, ✡️, 👟, but simple letters become question marks.

    #1240999
    Meno
    Participant

    In the future, letters will be obsolete.

    As will be talking with our mouths and looking at people face-to-face.

    The CR is merely preparing us for the future.

    #1241184
    👑RebYidd23
    Participant

    😠

Viewing 45 posts - 1 through 45 (of 45 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.