August 13, 2012 12:50 pm at 12:50 pm #604537
I was in Lakewood and I had some picture from a wedding on my smartphone.
It seemed some refused to even hold the smartphone to look at the pictures and others refused to hold the smart phone to look up a phone #?
Is this the new “Chumra” at least in Lakewood that its Assur to HOLD a smartphone. (They were ok with my using the smartphone for looking up information for them)August 13, 2012 1:28 pm at 1:28 pm #1197611
zahavasdad – I caught my son holding a smart phone and I made him give me his shoes for a whole week.August 13, 2012 1:33 pm at 1:33 pm #1197612
Had someone else taken a picture with them holding a smartphone and sent it in to their children’s school (or if the picture was casually seen by the Hanhala), they would have to look for a new school.
Can you blame them for being careful?August 13, 2012 1:38 pm at 1:38 pm #1197613
Perhaps they just did not trust you.August 13, 2012 1:40 pm at 1:40 pm #1197614
please be sure to post when the smart phone bon fires will take place.
i would like to offer to take some and distribute tehm to people who need them.
i remember the sheitel burning (what a joke) and figure smart phones are next in line.
thanks for the infoAugust 13, 2012 1:46 pm at 1:46 pm #1197615
Assuming they hold it’s assur to own one, I can see their logic.
1. A passerby may think it’s theirs. It’s like walking into a treif restaurant (to use the bathroom).
2. Theoretically, they can commit the same aveiros on your phone as they could on their own device.
Whereas by you using it, none of these “maris ayin”, etc. issues exist. They otherwise have no problem with technology. So they’re more than happy for you to look things up for them as they, too, recognize the value and utility provided by your device.August 13, 2012 1:51 pm at 1:51 pm #1197616
Lifi Shitascha, Smart phones must be ok and muttar, b/c there are “frum” Apps for them!August 13, 2012 2:03 pm at 2:03 pm #1197617
“(They were ok with my using the smartphone for looking up information for them)”
I guess they think they’re frummer than you. It’s ok for you to hold it and use it but not them chas v’shalom.
I never heard this new “chumra” but there are always new ones coming out so I’m not surprised.
Ask them to pose for a picture that you will take with your smartphone! See what happens. 😉August 13, 2012 2:09 pm at 2:09 pm #1197618
I dunno, but I’m in Lakewood right now holding a smart phone and not getting any stares.August 13, 2012 2:11 pm at 2:11 pm #1197619
I don’t know but.. My friend lives in Lakewood and her husband is in BMG, and SHE has an android. ( he does not).August 13, 2012 2:56 pm at 2:56 pm #1197620
Are you sure you weren’t in Chelm?August 13, 2012 3:35 pm at 3:35 pm #1197621
They trusted me, they all knew me and knew I wouldnt give them anything they shouldnt be seeing.
this occured in a private house and everyone knew everyone there, so Moris Ayin would not have applied.August 13, 2012 3:39 pm at 3:39 pm #1197622
I dunno, but I’m in Lakewood right now holding a smart phone and not getting any stares.
They just can’t tell it’s a smartphone.August 13, 2012 4:35 pm at 4:35 pm #1197623
some of these threads must come from chelmAugust 13, 2012 6:22 pm at 6:22 pm #1197624
some of these threads must come from chelm
Sometimes I wonder if there are real followers of the Rebbe of ChelmAugust 13, 2012 7:03 pm at 7:03 pm #1197625
I heard some famous Rabbi said if you see someone holding a smartphone smash it! May not be true….its only a rumorAugust 13, 2012 10:06 pm at 10:06 pm #1197626
zdad – I think what happened was that these guys were doing things they shouldn’t have on smartphones and their wives said, “You so much as TOUCH a smartphone and you can start packing your bags!!!” They were just honoring their wives.August 13, 2012 10:19 pm at 10:19 pm #1197627
Shopping: I certainly hope that no one said that. If he did, that Rabbi would be obligated to reimburse anyone whose phone was smashed by a follower of his.August 14, 2012 12:50 am at 12:50 am #1197628
Smartphones are only allowed to use the various banking apps that allow you to mkae payments for tuition or to the institutions that ban smartphone existance.
“They were ok with my using the smartphone for looking up information for them”
These must be the children of the hypocrites whose parents wouldn’t have a TV in the house but sent them over to my house to watch TV when they needed some alone time.August 14, 2012 1:45 am at 1:45 am #1197629
A couple of them were a Bochers, but a Bochers over 18
The others were married men whom I seriosuly doubt was abusing the internet and I doubt their wives would not trust them like that.
Every one was an adult. I would treat internet use for children like I do Liquor for children, the parents must approve to my face and if the parents arent there I wont let themAugust 14, 2012 1:48 am at 1:48 am #1197630
This is one of the causes of the modern day OTD syndrome. When instead of making logical and sensible rules like one may not browse indecent websites or use the internet at all we go overboard and make insensible and unreasonable rules like one may not even hold a smartphone, then eventually the rule will be questioned and abandoned totally. But if the rule was sensible in the first place then it is more likely to last. Anybody agree or disagree?August 14, 2012 2:35 am at 2:35 am #1197631
SL1 +1 Well said.August 14, 2012 2:54 am at 2:54 am #1197632
I saw them again tonite and I asked for a clarification
It seems there is some sort of rules for the Bochrim not to use the phone so they wont be tempted to get one.
I asked the Married men why they wont hold a phone and I was told it was like building a fence, One needs a fence to protect oneself sometimesAugust 14, 2012 3:44 am at 3:44 am #1197633
lakewoods a big place but most of the people here i know have a smart phone….some even have a filter!!
the people i dont know personally are the ones who stare and dont know how to drive….but this is not a lakewood venting thread so i wont go off topicAugust 14, 2012 4:03 am at 4:03 am #1197634
cshapiro, why do you live in a place that you hate. Why don’t you go live somewhere that you like?August 14, 2012 4:08 am at 4:08 am #1197635
I asked the Married men why they wont hold a phone and I was told it was like building a fence, One needs a fence to protect oneself sometimes
Posted 1 hour ago #
Chava told the snake that he wasn’t even allowed to touch the apple tree, the snake pushed chava into the APPLE tree, and shckingly enough nothing happened. so she thought if I touched the tree and noth happened I wonder what will happen if I eat the apple… she used the smartphone and she and her husband were banished from lakewood!August 14, 2012 4:31 am at 4:31 am #1197636
SL1 I most certainly agree with you.
If one wants to ‘build a fence’ for HIMSELF only- GREAT
No one should be building fences for others… Thats how one develops OTD syndrome. as SL1 saidAugust 14, 2012 4:34 am at 4:34 am #1197637
I dont hear it that way at all. I was a bit skeptical about their behavior and reasoning but it sounds to me like they made their own fences to strengthen themselves, and didn’t hold their noses or gasp when you offered. I have a lot of respect for people who make their own fences and it isn’t fair to compare it to Chava who did no such thing. I would LOVE to have a smart phone and every time I play with one I want it more. The only thing stopping me is my desire to be a different kind of role model to my kids.
I have family and friends on all parts of the orthodox spectrum and I do find that those who have all the tchachkes are the ones who say there is nothing wrong with it. It may be so, but I cannot believe they are speaking objectively.August 14, 2012 6:18 am at 6:18 am #1197638
I wasn’t exactly clear on what point you were making. However:
By comparing smartphones to Chava, why bother with Muktzeh? After all, it’s only a siyag.
While Chava may have erred in that particular instance, Pirkei Avos does advise “VaAsu Siyag LaTorah”.
Chazal also say to be miod miod zahir in inyanim of arayos, whereas that lashon was not used by the Eitz HaDaas.
Again, I see their logic even if it’s not a universal standard.August 14, 2012 6:22 am at 6:22 am #1197639
I thought it was a quince not an apple.August 14, 2012 7:18 am at 7:18 am #1197640
Sam2 the smasher does not owe anything neither does the Rabbi. That is according to this Rabbi, the rumor is its so bad you can do it on shabbos!August 14, 2012 10:58 am at 10:58 am #1197641
When someone bought an iphone he showed it to his friend how cool it was, His friend say, Hey this is cool and got one himeself and so the allure of the iPhone spread everyone said it was cool and everyone wanted one.
Its the same with this chumra. The man took a personal chumra . he then tells his friend about his personal chumra and the friend says, Hey thats a great idea and also adopts this chumra and so it spreads.
At some point it hits the leadership and they say , hey this is a great idea and impose this chumra on the entire community even among those who do not like it.
And Yes the SMASHER does owe for the phone, You cannot break someone elses property for your own personal halacha. BTW it was a chassidic rov so its unlikely a non-member of that chassidic group would break a non-members phoneAugust 14, 2012 2:56 pm at 2:56 pm #1197642
Shopping: No. The Rabbi is wrong. Even if you hold that a smartphone is absolutely Assur to use it is not Assur B’hana’ah. Therefore it has value to someone who owns it, even if he is not permitted to use it. He could sell it or even make it into a very expensive paperweight. A Rabbi who tells someone that they are allowed to be Mazik is Chayav to pay (the person listening to the Rabbi is an Annus). Therefore, the Rabbi would have to reimburse anyone who had his phone damaged because of this “p’sak”. (I heard about 10 years ago that R’ Elyashiv had a similar Shaila where a Ba’al T’shuvah threw his parents’ television set out the window and R’ Elyashiv said he was Chayav to pay because it’s not Assur B’hana’ah.)August 14, 2012 2:58 pm at 2:58 pm #1197643
So a Rav did say that?August 14, 2012 5:06 pm at 5:06 pm #1197644
Yes, he did. But ge was chassidish…..August 14, 2012 8:45 pm at 8:45 pm #1197645
The way I see it, he is a germophobe. Do you know ALL the places people use their smart phone? I’ve heard people use them in the bathroom (the sound effects when one plays games or talking to someone). So I don’t blame them for not wanting to touch a smart phone that may be host to thousands of germs and bacteria etc.
;August 14, 2012 11:35 pm at 11:35 pm #1197646
Zdad, most people aren’t looking to constantly add chumros to their lives, we have enough mitzvos to keep. If I decided to say 20 kapitlech tehillim every day to bring the geula and went around telling everybody about it (which the guys actually only told you the reasoning behind their “chumra” when you asked, although it was done publicly ) would you also have a problem with it?August 15, 2012 1:27 am at 1:27 am #1197647
Some people here seem quite irked at this episode, and I’d like to know why. These men in Lakewood did not go around forcing their chumros on anybody else; they were merely machmir on themselves. What issue could anybody possibly have with that?
“This is one of the causes of the modern day OTD syndrome. When instead of making logical and sensible rules like one may not browse indecent websites or use the internet at all we go overboard and make insensible and unreasonable rules like one may not even hold a smartphone, then eventually the rule will be questioned and abandoned totally. But if the rule was sensible in the first place then it is more likely to last. Anybody agree or disagree?”
I agree that making unreasonable rules leads people to abandon the rules entirely; however, that’s simply not what happened here. Nobody tried to enforce their chumros on anybody else here; they were only machmir themselves. And to do so is a beautiful thing that should be commended, not bashed.
The very first Mishna in Avos says “uhsue siyug la’Torah”, make a fence for the Torah. To suggest that the Medrash about Chava is meant to tell us not to have chumros (or to have less chumros) is simply not true, and is a gross distortion of the values put forth by the Torah.August 15, 2012 3:40 am at 3:40 am #1197648
mw13: The only people who can make a Syag are the undisputed leaders of the generation on everybody or an individual can chose to abstain from something himself (see, however, what the Aggadic Sefarim say about the Nazir V’yeish L’yashev B’arichus). However, when someone unilaterally imposes a Chumra on others is when we get the lesson from the story of the Nachash. The difference should be fairly clear.August 15, 2012 2:04 pm at 2:04 pm #1197649
I have a friend who put the standard iPhone ringtone (“Marimba”, it can be found on ipod nanos too) on his kosher phone. You should see the stares he gets when his phone rings.August 16, 2012 2:52 am at 2:52 am #1197650
Sam2 – I was not at all advocating unilaterally imposing chumros on the unwilling; I was simply pointing out that to say the Medrash is telling us not to have chumros is absolutely ridiculous. The Medrash only teaches us that we must differentiate between a siyug and an issur, and act accordingly.December 9, 2016 4:17 am at 4:17 am #1197651December 9, 2016 5:14 am at 5:14 am #1197652
mw13 -+1 for both posts on this thread.December 10, 2016 11:11 pm at 11:11 pm #1197653
Would someone arrange for a respected rabbi, or a large group of rabbis, to issue a posek that it is assur to hold a smartphone while driving. It will save lives. Then get the goyim to go to work on their priests, ministers, imams and zen masters.December 11, 2016 12:33 am at 12:33 am #1197654
Huju – I believe it’s been done. I think I have seen psakim that it’s assur to use a cell phone while driving.December 11, 2016 8:32 am at 8:32 am #1197655
☢️ 🚭 ☣️ Rand0m3x 🧠🕴️🎲Participant
Have you seen a psak against speeding, or turning without signaling?December 11, 2016 7:31 pm at 7:31 pm #1197656
Maris ayin applies even in the innermost chamber.
It would be maris ayin b/c someone might think the phone is theirs, etc.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.