January 4, 2016 7:34 pm at 7:34 pm #1174425
daas yachid – this is true when someone doesnt make enough money they need to work and do other stuff they wouldnt to make up for it.January 5, 2016 12:23 am at 12:23 am #1174426
daas yochid: “You made that up. You don’t like what Chaza”l say, so you decide that they didn’t mean it. But these things are nogeia l’halacha, regarding priority in aliyos, for example.”
Thats not very polite of you to say I dont like what chazal say- not very nice middos considering you insulted me and said something that is not true. Of course its not taken literally. Priority for aliyos? Besides the fact that no shule I have been to gives kedima for that, it wouldn’t matter. It still doesn’t change the fact that its not to be taken literally. When it comes to aggada you cant just quote something and say “well see it says it here”. Thats not how it works.
I asked, “Do you think there is absolutely no correlation between Torah learning and middos and/or ruchniyus (spirituality)?”
To which you responded, “There is no connection between middos and being an inherently better person.”, which did not answer my question (and was very wrong itself).”
There is a correlation between Torah learning and middos/ruchniyus but I dont know if there is a correlation between better middos and learning all day vs learning 4 hours a day and working. But there is NO correlation between Torah learning and being a better person. What happens if someone learns Torah everyday and gets hit by a car and cant learn anymore after the accident? Is he a worse person? Are women worse people because they dont learn Torah? Of course not.January 5, 2016 12:44 am at 12:44 am #1174427
“Categorizing some people as talmidei chachomim and categorizing other people as not being talmidei chachomim is ranking them, needs to be done and we do that ranking and it makes a practical difference how we treat each category.”
But we also respect ashirim right? Because it says it in the gem. So now you have to add money into the mix. We also respect yichus right? So now you have to add that into the mix. You are going to ostracize a lot of people and cause a lot of social problems by putting everyone in a society on a totem poll, measuring them by superficial values, and treating them accordingly. There are many people who would not want to be part of that society or suffer under the weight of it. Both men and women. People who learn in kollel are not “better”- im sorry if that bothers you. If they need to feel “better” in order to rough it out in kollel they shouldn’t be there in the first place.January 5, 2016 12:53 am at 12:53 am #1174428
I even hear some people say, “well men who learn all day are “higher” than other men, but not other women. Why not? Because women sacrifice in other ways.”
So a woman can can reach the highest madreigos with no Torah learning but a man who learns only half a day apposed to a full day is lower on the totem poll than a kollel wife who doesn’t learn at all?
We need to stop ranking and filing.January 5, 2016 1:34 am at 1:34 am #1174430
yes stop ranking. Hashem does the ranking for us.January 5, 2016 2:57 am at 2:57 am #1174431
Newbee, the gemara I quoted is referred to in Rambam and Shulchan Aruch. It’s not aggad’ta.January 5, 2016 3:10 am at 3:10 am #1174432
Newbee: Please explain the Mishna in Horios 3:7, the Rambam on that Mishna, and Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 252:8.January 5, 2016 3:23 am at 3:23 am #1174433
daasyochid: “Newbee, the gemara I quoted is referred to in Rambam and Shulchan Aruch. It’s not aggad’ta.”
It doesn’t matter. Its still aggadah and we dont take it literally. The gem also says a talmid chacham should not marry a woman who comes from a non-religious home and is a bale teshuva.
I guess all the girls who are bale teshuva should throw away their shidduch resumes?January 5, 2016 3:43 am at 3:43 am #1174434
According to your “logic” we can dismiss all Rambam and Shulchan Aruch as aggad’ta.January 5, 2016 3:54 am at 3:54 am #1174436
why should talmid chachams not marry baal teshuva? didnt you read the pasuk where it says the place where a baal teshuva stands a talmid chacham will never reach? what about a boy who was not religious and then becomes VERY religious so he shouldnt marry a frum girl? its better for this huge talmid chacham to marry someone not frum?January 5, 2016 3:58 am at 3:58 am #1174437
You see daasyochid, you conveniently left out the next sentence of the gem you quoted:
????? ????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?? ?”? ????? ??? ??”?
??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??????
??? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ??? ????
If we take it literally as you say, all the girls who come from non-frum families should not even bother looking for a nice Jewish learner.January 5, 2016 4:34 am at 4:34 am #1174438
MsPrincess: “why should talmid chachams not marry baal teshuva?”
Im not saying he should not, thats what daasyochid is saying because he is taking things literally when he should not be and claiming I am being illogical for saying otherwise. The gem daasyochid quoted immediately after says that a talmid chacham should not marry the daughter of someone who is not learned, such as a girl who comes from a non-frum family.January 5, 2016 4:35 am at 4:35 am #1174439
You don’t like the second half, which proves it must be wrong, which proves the first half must be wrong. Okay, not wrong, just not literally, meaning the gemara doesn’t actually care who you marry, nor do the the Rambam, Tur, Sh”A. Have I got your reasoning correctly?January 5, 2016 4:36 am at 4:36 am #1174440
Newbee: You have no answer to my last question?
It was deleted for being too blunt on a public website.January 5, 2016 4:38 am at 4:38 am #1174441
newbee – this is incorrect. he should marry a girl from a non frum family if she is a true baal teshuva and a tzadakis.January 5, 2016 4:40 am at 4:40 am #1174442
“Have I got your reasoning correctly?”
No, daasyochid, you dont have my reasoning correctly. I think you are confused.January 5, 2016 4:40 am at 4:40 am #1174443
“It was deleted for being too blunt on a public website.”
I can attest to that.January 5, 2016 4:43 am at 4:43 am #1174444
newbee – “this is incorrect. he should marry a girl from a non frum family if she is a true baal teshuva and a tzadakis.”
I hear you, so do other poskim and rabonim. But tell that to daasyochid who obviously disagrees with you.
If we take what I wrote on my other post about a bas kohen and rov ovadia, we must conclude according to you playing the literal game that any jewish male who learns an hour a day (thus being a talmmid chacham who is allowed to marry a bas kohen) should not marry a girl from a non-frum family.January 5, 2016 4:44 am at 4:44 am #1174445
So explain how you have a right to dismiss a gemara because you think it’s incorrect based in dismissing another gemara because you think it’s incorrect.
The gemara didn’t say a blanket issur, but it did give sound advice. You can learn through the meforshim, see the reasoning, and see how we apply it (or in some cases don’t apply it) l’ma’aseh. Just don’t dismiss it because you don’t find it PC.January 5, 2016 4:51 am at 4:51 am #1174446
I did read meforshim who specifically said we dont take these things literally. Its not because I dont find it PC. So we agree its advice that does not apply today in that way.
All aggada in the gem is advice, stories, messages that were directed to a society that was completely different from ours thousands of years ago. So you have to put the “advice” (your word not mine) in context. Good night, no hard feelings.January 5, 2016 5:10 am at 5:10 am #1174448
No hard feelings, but that’s not aggada.
It not not merely some vague message about the value of learning incorrectly using the lomed as an analogy.
It’s not literal in the sense that it’s a blanket issur, or that there aren’t factors to consider, but it’s a real preference based on what is typical for a talmid chochom. So sure, if what the gemara wants can be found where it’s not literally a talmid chochom (e.g. the Chazon Ish saying that marrying a Bais Yaakov girl is a kiyum of marrying a bas talmid chochom) that’s also fine.
The message that the gemara is saying isn’t vaguely about Torah, it’s about marriage, and therefore brought in those places in Rambam/Shulchan Aruch. The fact that the gemara expressed it in terms of a talmid chochom is because that is typically where the qualities desired are found.January 5, 2016 5:11 am at 5:11 am #1174449
your not suppose to take it literally.January 5, 2016 5:12 am at 5:12 am #1174450
Newbee: Your summation, in a nutshell, is that the Gemora’s advice to Klal Yisroel was only for the olden days of “thousands of years ago”, but is today irrelevant in our modern enlightened American society of the 21st century.January 5, 2016 5:26 am at 5:26 am #1174451
i dont think thats what shes trying to say shes trying to say that you shouldnt take it so literally.January 5, 2016 3:59 pm at 3:59 pm #1174452
Im a male btw msprincess- but yes thats what im saying you are correct. For instance, the gem in pesachim was written during a time when most of the people high up there and in general had impeccable pedigree and the very concept of being a talmid chacham was held to a much higher standard.January 5, 2016 4:03 pm at 4:03 pm #1174453
daas, No hard feelings, but that IS aggada. You just admitted its not legalistic and is advice.
“It’s not literal in the sense that it’s a blanket issur, or that there aren’t factors to consider, but it’s a real preference based on what is typical for a talmid chochom.”
typical for a talmud chochom? In what generation? What constitues a talmid chochom? in what country is it typical? But you said it as a blanket statement and you dont know what other factors there are to consider and you dont know how that aggadic statement applies in our current generation living in the year 2016.January 5, 2016 4:37 pm at 4:37 pm #1174454
That is still not aggada, and the underlying concept is still true.
?? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ?????January 5, 2016 4:47 pm at 4:47 pm #1174455
For some context, the OP was coming from a discussion which started here:
My position there is actually pretty much a b’feirush’a Rambam:
??? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???January 5, 2016 5:24 pm at 5:24 pm #1174456
the question should be is it better to work at a respectable job or do things that while not illegal or anti-torah to the letter of the law, have a whiff of wrongness
Like is it Ok to use section 8 to pay for rent on a house owned by your father-in-law, its legal and not against Halcha, but it certainly doesnt smell good. if you need to do such things to learn in kollel, maybe its better you workJanuary 5, 2016 5:59 pm at 5:59 pm #1174457
DY, Rambam was a talmid chacham and worked. In fact, as si well known, he execrated those who take communal funds in order to learn.January 5, 2016 6:08 pm at 6:08 pm #1174458
You know that we don’t pasken like that Rambam, that the meforshim say he would have agreed in a different era, and what R’ Moshe says about someone who wants to be “machmir” like that Rambam.January 5, 2016 6:33 pm at 6:33 pm #1174459
the answer is still no.January 5, 2016 6:36 pm at 6:36 pm #1174460
Avi, the Rambam defines a working baal haboss as someone who works three hours a day and learns Torah eight hours a day.January 5, 2016 6:51 pm at 6:51 pm #1174461
“he would have agreed in a different era”
Thats my point. Things change in different eras.
“That is still not aggada”
Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto, the Ramchal, discusses this two-tiered, literal-allegorical mode of transmission of the Aggadah in his well known Discourse on the Haggadot. He explains that the Oral Law, in fact, comprises two components: the legal component (??? ??????), discussing the mitzvot and halakha; and “the secret” component (??? ??????), discussing the deeper teachings. The aggadah, along with the Kabbalah, falls under the latter. The rabbis of the Mishnaic era believed that it would be dangerous to record the deeper teachings in explicit, mishnah-like, medium. Rather, they would be conveyed in a “concealed mode” and via “paradoxes”. (Due to their value, these teachings should not become accessible to those “of bad character” and due to their depth they should not be made available to those “not schooled in the ways of analysis”.) This mode of the transmission was nevertheless based on consistent rules and principles such that those “equipped with the keys” would be able to unlock their meaning; to others they would appear as non-rational or fantastic.January 5, 2016 7:31 pm at 7:31 pm #1174462
Newbee, this is clearly the former.January 5, 2016 8:37 pm at 8:37 pm #1174463
Avram in MDParticipant
Like is it Ok to use section 8 to pay for rent on a house owned by your father-in-law, its legal and not against Halcha, but it certainly doesnt smell good.
Can you explain to me why it doesn’t “smell good”?January 5, 2016 10:14 pm at 10:14 pm #1174464
i dont see what the argument here is. the answer is no there not and dont rank people. why is everyone arguing over such a thing?January 5, 2016 11:04 pm at 11:04 pm #1174465
DY: Yes, but according to how most read the Rambam the Heter only applies to those who are/will become Rabbonim and teachers, not to Stam people who just want to sit and learn. Some extend the Rambam past that, but this Rambam has already been stretched thin enough.
Joseph: That is a misreading of the Rambam. He says that because he assumes that it would only take 3 hours of work a day to earn a living. If it would take more he would say to work more. Read the entire Halachah.January 5, 2016 11:39 pm at 11:39 pm #1174466
Sam, even if the Rambam would asser, we don’t pasken that way.January 6, 2016 4:22 am at 4:22 am #1174467
Avram – its stated openly in the HUD contract that the owner is not a family member of the renter. In the link below, see section 8c. I’d say it smells a bit crimey, not sure I understand the doubt expressed here.
The owner (including a principal or other interested party) is not the parent, child, grandparent, grandchild, sister, or brother of any member of the family, unless the PHA has determined (and has notified the owner and the family of such determination) that approving rental of the unit, notwithstanding such relationship, would provide reasonable accommodation for a family member who is a person with disabilitiesJanuary 6, 2016 1:34 pm at 1:34 pm #1174468
Joseph, Rambam said that about a person who has a trade. I imagine that that would also go for people who can set themselves up for a long time with one or two deals (e.g. chazanim who make enough during the Yamim Noraim to learn the rest of the year or diamond merchants). He himself had a grueling work schedule as he wrote to his translator Samuel ibn Tibbon.
Avram, Judge Learned Hand (yes, that was his name) said “Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as
possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the
treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one’s taxes.
Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister
in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone
does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any
public duty to pay more than the law demands.” The same should go for benefiting from Section 8. However, IMHO it does not “smell right” to deliberately have a low income in order to qualify. It should not matter who owns the house. Chazal (Avot D’Rabbi Natan 11:1) believed that “A person should love work and not hate it; for just as the Torah was given with a covenant, so too was work given with a covenant.”January 6, 2016 2:13 pm at 2:13 pm #1174469
This name is already takenParticipant
you shouldn’t scam the HUD SystemJanuary 6, 2016 3:29 pm at 3:29 pm #1174470
Can you explain to me why it doesn’t “smell good”?
Put aside Kollel, jew, etc and just stam a person, would you approve of it or complain they were stealing from the government?
A Kollel family should be an example of the proper way to live and be a kiddish hashem. Playing a game with hud does not put kollel families in a positive lightJanuary 6, 2016 3:59 pm at 3:59 pm #1174471
That doesn’t answer the question.January 6, 2016 4:10 pm at 4:10 pm #1174472
I think some of the confusion here may have arisen from zdad being polite and using the phrase “doesn’t smell good” instead of coming right out and saying “it’s illegal.”
So the explanation of why it smells bad would be that to some people’s sensitive noses illegal activity has a bad smell.January 6, 2016 4:16 pm at 4:16 pm #1174473
its legal and not against Halcha,January 6, 2016 4:29 pm at 4:29 pm #1174474
Ok DY, I stand corrected.January 6, 2016 4:31 pm at 4:31 pm #1174475
We have Gedarim for things that are not against Halacha, but are not in the spirit of HalchaJanuary 6, 2016 4:43 pm at 4:43 pm #1174476
“We have Gedarim for things”
I think the passuk calls it “Vehyisem Nekiim”, which I believe is a mitvas aseh (double check that in the sefer hamitzvos).January 6, 2016 11:39 pm at 11:39 pm #1174477
It’s breach of contract. Which may or may not be illegal. Sei yeah sei no, a ben torah would never do such a thing. Only a shameless liar would.
Anyone still confused?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.