Clarification to mod and DaMoshe

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Clarification to mod and DaMoshe

Viewing 50 posts - 651 through 700 (of 824 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #2273340
    ujm
    Participant

    CS: You don’t realize that a woman dressing non-tznius in public is far worse than someone else who sins in private? Like coffee addict pointed out, she is being חוטא ומחטיא while the other is just a חוטא. She is causing hundreds of people who see her, even inadvertently (let alone advertently) to sin every day. She will be punished for the thousands and thousands of other she caused to sin.

    #2273332
    ujm
    Participant

    CS: “Similarly, throughout history, when communal standards fell in a certain area, even very important areas such as sota and murderers, the response was Sanhedrin shutting down, not executing however many Jews were unfortunately involved. Same with the Rambam I just mentioned.”

    The Rambam writes that if a Beis Din needs to execute 100 people per day, they can and should do so.

    #2273371
    GadolHadofi
    Participant

    Aveira,

    “Gadol, it’s in a letter the Gaon wrote to his daughter”.

    So it’s not brought down as Halacha in any of his writings. Please share the precise quote from the letter.

    #2273433
    AviraDeArah
    Participant

    Modern “rabbis” like to say as a ln article of faith that “the obligation of shmiras aynayim is squarely on the shoulders of men” – they repeat it as if it were a pasuk. They say it the same way they repeat ad nauseum a line of “living a modern life within the framework of halacha.”

    These are both meaningless sound bytes which have zero logic or mesorah. A 5th grader knows what lifnei iver is. The same 5th grader can read pele yoetz which writes that women take the first punishment if a man is nichshal by looking at them, if they are not dressed according to halacha.

    It’s a powerful urge to justify pritzus that leads modern clergymen to spew that line; they will do anything and everything to not admit that their community has a serious problem.

    But of course they have no problem chastising the frum for how we supposedly treat goyim and don’t serve in the Israeli army.

    #2273446
    AviraDeArah
    Participant

    Dofi, it’s published as iggeres hagra. The lashon he writes is that his mother does not need his mussar because she is a tzenuah. In other versions of the letter the text spells out that tznius does for a woman what Torah does for a man, regarding fighting the yatzer hora.

    It’s cited in basically every mussar sefer that is aimed at women, including rav shimshon pinkus.

    #2273472
    sechel83
    Participant

    The chazon ish learned Kabalah? Rav shach and reb aharon also?
    They wrote seforim on it like niglah? Anyone saw them learn it? Or just your friend made it up?
    I never heard of in chabad we do or do not “hold of the תפארת ישראל”
    I thought that’s simple pshat in the Mishnah, you argued, so I brought the tiferes yisroel, maybe you bring me a proof that you should go after your logic and not your rebbe.
    The Mishnah also says עשה לך רב
    All chassidim held you need a rebbe to follow not to pick and choose whatever you want from each rebbe, cuz then your not following anyone. So it’s bologna to say “I’m heimish, I hold of everyone but I dont go to any rebbe or follow any rebbe)

    #2273474
    ujm
    Participant

    Just go to any Jewish cemetary. Many tombstones for women will list her first quality as having been a Tzanua.

    #2273494
    GadolHadofi
    Participant

    Aveira,

    In a letter written while traveling, the Vilna Gaon directed various members of his family to strengthen themselves in specific areas relevant to them individually. When his mother wondered why she wasn’t mentioned, the Gaon replied that her high level of tznius made such directives unnecessary. The letter did not state that “tznius does for a woman what Torah does for a man”, nor did he make this statement in any of his Halachic writings.

    #2273526
    sechel83
    Participant

    The gaon- tznius: maybe only the gaon held that way chassidim not! Btw Tanya says that תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם was only בזמן השס not today, today the ikar avoda is tzedaka

    #2273547
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @sechel

    this tiferet yisrael is definitely not ‘simple pshat’ in a mishna.
    It goes straight against the rama , shach and accepted halahik practice.

    Rama permits/ mandates to be holek in halaha on your rebbi [even rebbi muvhak – rov torato mimenu] if you have ra’yot.
    Others even if it is only miSvara.
    YD242:3

    Kol hameharhar ahar rabo [sanhedrin 110a] comes from the pasuk where yehudim falsely ascribed to Moshe rabenu [who provided ‘man from heaven’ as food for the dor hamidbar], that this ‘man’ has the non-existent attribute of blowing up inside one’s stomach. [rashi on humash]

    In other words , making up non existing baloney as a negative for your rebbi, that falls under kol hameharhar ahar rabo.
    That the rebbi made a mistake , that s not included in kol hameharhar , and is definitely possible, and is permitted to be said by the talmid. as per rama above.

    Kedai to keep in mind , however, that like the rebbi is liable to make a mistake , the talmid is even more so [kal vahomer]

    #2273560
    AviraDeArah
    Participant

    Sechel, want to know what chasidim think of tznius? Ever walk around Williamsburg? Kiryas yoel? Skver? Tosh? Tznius is THE ikkar by them and they’re stricter than litvishe!

    #2273619
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @sechel
    Do you agree that ani maamin shezot hatorah lo teheh muhlefget , that the torah is nitschi ?

    Hope you do .

    If so, how can you quote tanya that talmud torah keneged kulam does not apply nowadays ?
    .

    #2273709
    ARSo
    Participant

    I believe in Tanya it does indeed say that nowadays tzedokoh is more important than talmud Torah, and he explains his reasoning, but I can’t find it at the moment. Can someone please suppply an exact source?

    #2273754
    sechel83
    Participant

    I didn’t make it up, Tanya igeres hakodesh 9 quotes I from arizal. Why it’s not against nitzchiyus hatorah simply maybe cuz the rambam says that refers to halachos of Torah. See Mishnah Torah. Same way arizal and medrashim say that shakla vitarya of Torah will be batul לעתיד לבוא.

    #2273810
    ARSo
    Participant

    Thanks for the source, sechel. And that’s where he explains – at least the way I understand it – that the talmud Torah of the times of Chazal was on a completely different level because that was their main avodah. We, on the other hand, do not learn on that level, and therefore for us action – i.e. Tzedokoh – is more important.

    #2273839
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @ sechel
    Anyone understands the answer ?
    Why is this not against nitshiyut hatorah ?
    Sechel is not referring to yemot hamashiach , he is referring to us , now.
    ?

    #2273847
    sechel83
    Participant

    Saying talmud torah kineged kulam dosent apply anymore is not changing any mitzvah, only talking about its level of importance. So its not a contradiction to nitzchiyus hatorah.
    2) The ikar of Nitzchiyus hatorah applies even after moshiach comes and also techiyas hamasim. See nidah daf 61, rishnim there. (reb elchonon) and at length kuntres הלכות של תורה שבעל פה שאינן בטלין לעולם, and שיחת יום ב’ דחג השבועות תנש”א – בענין תורה חדשה מאיתי תצא

    I was just saying that it was mentioned that the gaon says that tznius is as important for women as torah is for men. Arizal argues that torah is not the main avoda. Chassidim who follow the arizal 1) dont follow the vilna gaon 2) dont hold the same about limud howrah as the people who follow the gaon as seen in tanya, and all over sifrai chassidus, the stress on davening, tzedaka, etc (like igeres 9) so you need another proof for chassidim about the “ikar” of tznius. The fact that satmer is very machmir more than litvaks very nice, it dosent make it the most important thing in yiddishkiet just like the fact they wear shtraimels dosent either, or the fact they dont vote or make sure to say tachnun on 5 iyar even if there is a bris.

    דבר ברור ומפורש בתורה שהיא מצוה עומדת לעולם ולעולמי עולמים, אין לה לא שינוי ולא גרעון ולא תוספת, שנאמר: את כל הדבר אשר אנכי מצוה אתכם אותו תשמרון לעשות, לא תוסף עליו ולא תגרע ממנו[2]. ונאמר: והנגלות לנו ולבנינו עד עולם, לעשות את כל דברי התורה הזאת[3]. הא למדת שכל דברי תורה מצווין אנו לעשותן עד עולם. וכן הוא אומר: חוקת עולם לדורותיכם[4]. ונאמר: לא בשמים היא[5], הא למדת שאין נביא רשאי לחדש דבר מעתה. הלכות יסודי התורה פרק ט, הלכה א
    ועיקרי הדברים ככה הן: שהתורה הזאת אין חוקיה ומשפטיה משתנים לעולם ולעולמי עולמים, ואין מוסיפין עליהן ולא גורעין מהן. וכל המוסיף או גורע, או שגילה פנים בתורה והוציא הדברים של מצוות מפשוטן, הרי זה בוודאי רשע ואפיקורוס. הלכות מלכים ומלחמותיהם ומלך המשיח פרק יא, הלכה ג
    ראה גם פי’ מראה הפנים לירושלמי שם: “אמתת הדבר כך הוא .. ליכא מידי דכתיבי בנביאים וכתובים ולא רמיזי באורייתא .. אלא שצריך בינה יתירה להוציא הרמז מן התורה ולידע ולהבין ולהשכיל המקום ההוא בהתורה שנרמז בה כל דבר מהכתובים .. וכל זה הוא עכשיו, אבל לעתיד דכתיב ומלאה הארץ דעה וגו’, ולא יצטרכו ללמוד זה מזה, כולם ידעו וישכילו לכל הנרמז בהתורה מהנביאים והכתובים כו'”.

    (this is one example that if you think over the question, my answer etc, you see how a bit more looking into the sugya you have your “shtarke kashe” answered)

    #2273901
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @sechel .

    In short your answer is-
    that the principle of Nitzhiyut hatorah is not applicable to the ‘importance’ of mitzvot.

    Even when as a result of this ‘diminished importance’ , people will leave that previously important mitsva and do the previously less important mitsva.

    Do you have a source for this claim ?

    Arso’s answer is more understandable , but this is a big hidush – that talmud torah keneged kulam is only referring to t’t as practiced in time of hazal . But ‘second class’ t’t [even as practiced by people like arizal and Sh’a hrav !!] , we do not say the principle that t’t keneged kulam.

    Would like to know whether there is source for this pshat too ?

    #2273916
    ARSo
    Participant

    yankel berel, I think that we would all agree that the Baal Hatanya was great and accepted enough that if he says something, even if it seems strange to us, we can accept it as being a correct shitah, even if it is not the shitah of others.

    sechel: Saying talmud torah kineged kulam dosent apply anymore is not changing any mitzvah, only talking about its level of importance. So its not a contradiction to nitzchiyus hatorah.

    That is untrue! If it says in Chazal תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם then that is as everlasting as anything else. That is why I suggested that the level of talmud Torah that Chazal was talking about – which was and IS everlasting – is not today’s level. Btw it’s only a suggestion, and maybe there’s a better answer (but I have no intention of looking in a Lubavich source of less than 100 years old to find that answer).

    As to the tznius issue, sorry sechel, but you are totally wrong. Tznius is one of the MOST important mitzvos for women, and everyone except for MO and Lubavich seems to agree with that. It is certainly far more important than going on mivtzoim or learning chassidus.

    #2273957
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @sechel
    You still owe me an answer on this one ….
    —————-
    Tanya asks on his previous principle where he states a Jew [i.e. US] is meant to have also love and also hate towards a sinner. How does that fit with the pasuk of tahlit sin’a , where David hamelech is SHOWING US that the proper approach is hate only , without love.

    To summarize , we have conflicting directives for US , is it love plus hate, or is it hate only ?

    Answer of the Tanya is that it depends which type of sinner is it , the apikores type of sinner or the ma’amin type of sinner.

    The apikores type the ‘only hate’ approach applies FOR US.
    The ma’amin type of sinner ‘the ‘love-hate’ type approach applies FOR US.

    That is the pshat for any unbiased learner of Tanya . This is plain obvious.

    If pshat would be like sechel and all other habad apologists who are biased against the pashute pshat, why doesn’t tanya answer the question by saying the pasuk is talking about david hamelech and not for us ??

    Al korchach that both his previous principle AND this pasuk are meant to be taken as directives FOR US.
    —————————————-
    Am still waiting …
    .

    #2274119
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @arso
    Agree with you about the greatness of the baal hatanya.
    But still am lacking understanding in this particular point.

    #2274164
    sechel83
    Participant

    Yankel berel. Open up a Tanya and read!
    Need more mekoros, it’s a clear rambam inhilchos mamrim that sons of apikorsim these halachos don’t apply too. Also the chafetz chayim writes about this in אהבת חסד that it doesn’t apply to today’s apikorsim.
    I’m getting mixed up with who wrote what but I find it really shocking that you accuse the arizal and the Baal hatanya of kefira. I guess now I realize who I’m dealing with, first I just thought you read some misquoted things in yated or bergers book, now I see you guys are real mosnagdim don’t accept the Baal hatanya of ari zal!
    Arsos pshat in Tanya is simply crooked
    How can the Gemara have a machlokes if מצוות בטילות the rambam clearly writes that mitzvos last FOREVER

    #2274179
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @sechel
    Typical habad answer- again.
    First attack and denigrate the questioner.
    Then give a [non] answer.
    —-
    not even clear in your answer what you are referring to. The question about t’t keneged kulam ? which was Asked just now.

    Or the question about ahavat apikorsim tanya 32 . which was a while ago and is not on tanya but on neohabads compatibility with the brackets in tanya . Which was asked a while ago. There was an attempted answer from sechel with a following refutation from yb which was left unanswered by sechel.

    Btw, no one accused tanya or arizal of kfira.

    The only [wrongly] accused here which I can find , is yb. He is wrongly accused of saying that the bal hatanya is a kofer.

    Question for sechel.
    Sechel is very into ‘hate and love’ .
    Nevertheless sechel is wrongly accusing yb of libeling the tanya.

    Is that a manifestation of ‘love’ towards yb ? Or the opposite ?

    #2274186
    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    Sechel,

    You know the rambam came after the Gemara right?

    He paskens like the מאן דאמר the says they aren’t

    #2274551
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @sechel
    this is one example that if you think over the question, my answer etc, you see how a bit more looking into the sugya you have your “shtarke kashe” answered
    —–
    דבר ברור ומפורש בתורה שהיא מצוה עומדת לעולם ולעולמי עולמים, אין לה לא שינוי ולא גרעון ולא תוספת,
    Thats the lashon harambam ,sechel is quoting.

    Three things can not happen to any mitsva of the torah
    1] Shinuy
    2] Gira’on
    3] Tosefet

    Sechel agrees that ,at least still in the times of hazal,, the nature of the mitsva of Talmud Torah was shakul keneged all other mitsvot .
    So Sechel agrees that this mitsve as it was given by HKBH to Moshe , WAS shakul keneged all other mitsvot .

    Sechel also says [and here he seems to be supported by the pashute pshat in tanya] that at a certain moment, there was a ‘change’ , and this mitsve ‘lost’ its privileged status , is ‘demoted’ and from now and onwards it is only a ‘regular’ mitsva , not shakul keneged all other mitsvot.

    Sechel wants us to believe that this change and this demotion , is not included in the definition of Shinuy, nor the definition of gira’on.

    Nu , Nu …..

    #2274642
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @sechel
    have a look in She’ilat Yavets end of Tshuva 5 where he brings numerous examples of people [who are wothy of hora’a] being holek on their rebbi -even muvhak.

    So i would suggest to CS not to tell her brothers yet that she is besting all those non habad people even though she never learnt in a yeshiva.
    Same to sechel….

    #2274742
    CS
    Participant

    Yb,

    “So you disagree with sechel that tahlit hasin’a , is talking about david hamelech only, and not to us ?”

    I’m not sure what sechel said. My point was that the Alter Rebbe was referring to a small small sect of people, and even those don’t exist today, because the ones off, aren’t doing it because of their knowledge of Hashem and Yiddishkeit, but rather from their lack of it

    #2274741
    CS
    Participant

    * over another

    #2274740
    CS
    Participant

    Coffee addict,

    “The lady is a חוטא ומחטיא the guy looking at things on his devices is just a חוטא”

    This was addressed to Arso, but to your distinction, lashon hara is the same. And dishonesty in business. So why pick one Mitzvah one another?

    #2274739
    CS
    Participant

    Avira,

    ““if you know aleph teach aleph”

    Equals

    A guy with a glow in the dark pen leading a group of people on a cliff in pitch dark.”

    I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but my point is simple. If someone is weak in lashon hara say, but a paradigm of dressing tznius- she can teach what she has- a passion for tznius.

    People are imperfect on whatever level it is, but you don’t have to wait to kill your yetzer hara to help another Jew- simply share what you do have with them. And we frum yidden all have so much to give

    #2274738
    CS
    Participant

    Avira,

    “CS – no hilchos tznius in the “classic seforim”? See the sources brought in mishnah berurah 75 s”k2, and all of the sources brought in halichos bas yisroel. It’s literally all over the place.

    It’s dealt with mainly regarding ervah l’inyan krias shma and talmud Torah. That’s where the poskim discuss which parts of the body must be covered and give the details you were taught. Elbows, knees, collarbone, etc..

    That’s why thw sefer halichos bas yisroel was very important, because he compiled the poskim who discussed the details of tznius, but they were everywhere and needed little chidushim.”

    That’s my point. Tznius is not its own Mitzvah doyraisa, as lashon hara is, and there is no classic source of hilchos tznius- even in kitzur shulchan aruch- where a man and woman can open up and read about what’s das Moshe, Das yehudis, and Minhag Hamakom etc with regards to tznius. Of course it’s part of Yiddishkeit and there are scattered references (mainly in regards to what defines erva for a man, not directly addressing women’s dress).

    “Regarding lashon hora, i am referring to details. What is the definition? What are the tenoim for toeles? When can one believe LH and when can you only be concerned about it? These aee things not discussed at all in the rishonim, st least not directly. The chofetz chaim labored greatly to learn this sugya and come to conclusions in halacha.”

    Yes- all the credit to him. I did find a section on forbidden speech in Rambam, and there’s probably sections dedicated in Gemara to forbidden speech. That was my point here.

    “In tznius, there was no such need for the author of halichos bas yisroel to do that. Read the sefer, even though it was not written by a Lubavitcher..it won’t hurt your worldviiew.”

    I’ve heard of Halichos Bas Yisrael. Lubavitch has Kvuda Bas Melech by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, as well as other hashkofa books- such as The Rebbe on Modesty.

    I also own oz vhadar lvusha by Rabbi Falk z”l. Funny thing is, I wanted to look up sources. He doesn’t give sources and says he’ll list them separately. I don’t know if there is a book of sources. But just to my point- it wasn’t easy for him either to find sources- they’re not mainly in one place

    #2274747
    CS
    Participant

    Yb,

    “A] Rambams respecting talmidei hahamim has NOTHING AT ALL to do with the question of infallibility.
    Please CS , can you own up to this one ?

    B] “Rebelling against his rebbi” is mentioned in the context of answering she’elot without the Rebi’s permission or in the rebbi’s locality.
    [Cf Sh’A hilhot kevod rabbo]
    Not in the context of infallibility .
    Sh’A permits [even mandates] to argue on one rebbi’s halahic decisions, provided it s done respectfully.
    Please CS , can you own up to this one too ?”

    I saw the page in the sefer hamitzvos and would need to look it up in greater detail- could be your right- if you have sources even better.

    Regardless, no one is infallible. R’ Yochanan kohen gadol case in point. Now, there is a story of the Noda Biyehuda who was sure he paskened wrongly because the shaila wasn’t practical. The same with a story in early Chabad (AR and TT). How does this go?

    When a leader sincerely tries to do what’s right, he has siyata dishmaya not to make mistakes (which will also affect others.)

    But, if he slips to his yetzer hara in something minor to most people, it can become a slippery slope and he can end up an open rasha like the story of RYKG mentioned above.

    “C] Al yemin shehu smol veal smol shehu yemin , the rashi you mentioned is speaking about sanhedrin hagadol in yerushalayim where it is indeed prohibited to argue against”

    I don’t recall Rashi mentioning Sanhedrin, just quoting it in relation to our leaders. You’re welcome to correct

    #2274735
    CS
    Participant

    Yb
    “the leader of the habad hasidim gave explicit instructions to his followers. whenever you engage in debate with people of a different persuasion , you must do so with the condition that you [the follower] in your own mind give NO CREDENCE WHATSOEVER EVEN TO THE POSSIBILITY that he might have something to tell you that you previously did not know.

    That is their starting point.”

    I never heard this. To me, if anyone is questioning the Rebbe or his teachings, I’ll look to see if that person or group has greater depth of connection to Hashem for me in their teachings. Or if the person is a greater leader etc. I haven’t found that to be true. Not just me, but a soon to be giyores iyH who I had taught Chassidus on the basis of thinking she was Jewish, (I think I’ve heard Chassidus is ok to teach goyim too- they’re also obligated to believe in Hashem), told me that Chassidus had infected her so to speak- that when she is told about a mandatory class she needs to take for giyur and how it’s so amazing and deep, she’s found everything dry and basic (I’m talking hashkofa etc) after learning Chassidus. We both agreed that Breslov Chassidus does seem to impart the same fire, but personally, I see how Chassidus Chabad enhances that too, and helps a person experience closeness with Hashem without needing to escape oneself and one’s circumstances to do so.

    #2274736
    CS
    Participant

    Yb,

    “I must concede – their rebbi did a good job.
    He transformed them exactly in to what he wanted them to be.”

    Amen! We’re all working on it:)
    .

    #2274737
    CS
    Participant

    Avira,

    “Also, “classic” seforim that discuss the mussar elements of tznius as the mainstay of a woman include menoras hamaor, pele yoetz, and many others. Ths Gaon famously wrote that tznius is for women what Torah is for men.”

    While I’ve learned your point, and again 💯 agree that tznius is important, I meant classic as in before the Taz and Shach. (Pretty sure what you mentioned was more contemporary, correct me if not.)

    #2274751
    CS
    Participant

    Also,

    Yes I could ask if it was a serious question to me (tzaddik beemunaso etc). Being that that’s just #88 out of #200 complaints etc you’ll have, I don’t see the need. (Not as easy to ask women- not everyone fluent in sources.) others are welcome to answer. Or, next time I hear it in Tanya shiur I’ll iyH look it up and get back to you:)

    “Which, in a way, is worse, because your implication was that all other chassidim do these wrong things, which Lubavich allegedly does not do. Had you written about, say, Satmar, then it would have been lashon hara (actually motzi shem ra) just against them. The way you wrote it, however, it is against all other chassidim.”

    Did I say Chassidim? I’m pretty sure I said it could be some unspecified people MAY etc.

    #2274752
    CS
    Participant

    But you know what Arso, I think I want to change. See, you come saying lubavitch is horrible because of this and this. The answer would naturally be- actually this isn’t all correct and/ or others have their own issues.

    That’s basically the pattern. Then we need to prove ourselves.

    But I’m now inclined to regret that as I’ve learned a new path forward from the Rebbe about how the way to humility is not only recognizing your own faults/ how others could have done better with your gifts etc. But a completely higher path is looking for the good in others. (Likutei Sichos Vayikra 17:1)

    Now I know I have to grow in humility, and Hashem can’t dwell with gaava etc etc.- so I’m working on implementing this. I’ll have to see if I can still navigate the conversation here.

    I’m going to try:)

    #2274753
    CS
    Participant

    Arso,

    “1. A worker does not have to DEMAND his wages in order for the employer to be over bal talin. It is enough if he asks to be paid.”

    I believe the context was how could The Rebbe say we should demand Moshiach? Point here was the chofetz chaim uses the same word- and he didn’t say ask nicely.

    “2. Blatant lack of tznius is worse than many other aveiros for a number of reasons. Firstly, as I have written, it is machshil many men many times a day.
    Secondly, as it is a public lack of tznius, it is befarhesia, and thus worse than an aveira done privately.
    Thirdly, when a woman who knows the halachos decides to go out in public in a non-tznius manner, she is announcing that she doesn’t care about the halacha. Someone who, for example, speaks lashon hara because he is ‘attacked’ by his yetzer hara, has not planned on doing so. I would agree that if someone stands on a street corner and attempts to stop passersby and tell them lashon hara, he would be just as bad. But that is something that generally doesn’t happen.”

    All of this is no less relevant to lashon hara or dishonesty in business etc. Many women who don’t dress tznius do it because they struggle with the image tznius clothing gives off, and feel non tznius clothing looks better on them etc. The dress yetzer hara is one men don’t have (even goyishe men cover up), as they weren’t blessed with beauty, and can’t relate. It’s not because she could care less. Btw The struggle with the recent men’s fashions of tighter clothing etc. is only a tiny taste of what women deal with, because by her it’s not only about fashion but also beauty.

    Now of course, learning enough Chassidus on the topic, elevates one to a place where they feel disdainful towards non Jewish fashion, and feel that tznius is the look they are proud to wear, and the other clothing cheapens women and isn’t beautiful at all:)

    #2274756
    CS
    Participant

    I can’t believe I’m still on the same page I started with (13:(). I hope you enjoy my posts until next time:)

    #2274772
    AviraDeArah
    Participant

    CS, why does something need to be in older seforim for it to be valid? Chasidus isn’t in any sefer before 200 years ago. The peleh yoetz was before that.

    Halichos bas yisroel is full of sources. Rabbi falk’s isnt – he was writing mainly as an instruction guide, and most women aren’t interested in looking things up. Most women just want to know what to do and what not to do and not he concerned with the sources or even the reasons. I learned this the hard way when i was in shidduchim and afterwards; a simple “yes” or “no” is usually what they want.

    The kitzur was written only 130ish years ago. And it was definitely not written for women.

    Plus, all jewish women were tznius in those days. You didn’t need halacha shailohs and minimum requirements, because everyone was covered up and no one would dare do otherwise. There was absolutely no “fashion” industry and women didn’t wear clothes that were, to use an expression which somehow became popular among frum women, “flattering.” Take a look at pictures of European and sefardi jewish towns. More tznius than satmar! It was the הלוך ילך, the רוח אפינו – some things are so plainly obvious, so fundamental, that any simple jew knows them. Even the amei haaretz in chazal aren’t criticized for dressing untzius.

    You’re defending the indefensible.

    And to the point of being machshil others, LH only is machshil others if they believe it, and it’s not something the person walks around doing nonstop. A woman who walks around untzius will be machshil men every second of her life and amass boatloads of sins that will not he attoned for by asking your rebbe for forgiveness or learning his musings.

    #2274773
    AviraDeArah
    Participant

    “Now of course, learning enough Chassidus on the topic, elevates one to a place where they feel disdainful towards non Jewish fashion, and feel that tznius is the look they are proud to wear, and the other clothing cheapens women and isn’t beautiful at all:)”

    Learning yiras shomayim does that too. If chasidus automatically did that for women, why would the community that has the most chasidus study also have one of if not the biggest problems with tznius in klal yisroel (aside from MO)?

    #2274775
    sechel83
    Participant

    Yankel berel. So you come up with an answer! Or you think you know better than arizal and alter rebbe? Btw your statement that the rambam paskens like one shita and after that the other is kfira, is 100% wrong. Learn the sugya!
    According to your logic: the mitzvah of Talmud Torah changed, well tznius also did. Cuz the gra said it’s so important, so unless you find me an earlier source for that, he’s “changing” a mitzvah.

    #2274778
    ujm
    Participant

    Coffee addict,

    “The lady is a חוטא ומחטיא the guy looking at things on his devices is just a חוטא”

    This was addressed to Arso, but to your distinction, lashon hara is the same. And dishonesty in business. So why pick one Mitzvah one another?

    CS: How is dishonesty in business חוטא ומחטיא? Regarding L”H, he might be מחטיא the person he’s telling the L”H to (if the person doesn’t stuff his ears), but a woman walking down Eastern Parkway the same way she goes for a swim, is being מחטיא hundreds and hundreds of people every single day, day after day. It is far worse, even simply in terms of quantity, and she will be punished for every one of those thousands upon thousands of people she caused to sin day after day for years and years.

    #2274825

    > a woman walking down Eastern Parkway the same way she goes for a swim

    I don’t know what is on your mind, but it is possible to swim in a burka. Just ask your wives.

    #2274838
    ARSo
    Participant

    For some reason a number of my posts – harmeless ones that would not have been edited – have been lost to the ether, and I don’t remember all I wrote. But one I do.

    CS wrote: The Rebbe was quoting, in the very early years, at a small farbrengen, what a mashpia had said regarding the Chazon Ish, that even someone such as he, would be jealous in gan Eden of a little boy learning Chassidus…
    This reminds me of another Chassidishe teaching that the loftiest Malach would give up everything for a single amen Yehei Shmei Rabba by a yid.

    (I have no idea whether or not the last statement is takke a chassidic teaching, but I’ll run with it anyway.) The two are not comparable. A Malach doesn’t have bechirah, and he is therefore perfect on his level. If he is (or in fact, can be) jealous of a Yid saying Yehei etc, it does not indicate any fault of his. The Chazon Ish, on the other hand, was a human, and if he would be jealous of something it would indicate that he did not do what he should have done, and therefore be a fault.

    #2274831
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @sechel
    hope you are more accurate in your learning and your medame milta lemilta than your accuracy in determining who you are talking to.

    First read.
    Then stop.
    Think .
    Then answer.

    Shabat shalom

    #2274832
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @sechel
    According to your logic: the mitzvah of Talmud Torah changed, well tznius also did. Cuz the gra said it’s so important …. he’s “changing” a mitzvah.
    [sechel to yb]
    ——————————————————–
    Gra said tsniut IS AND WAS important .
    Does that equal “change” or not ?
    Obviously not.

    You , however ,are claiming that T’T WAS important and now it isn’t important.
    Does that equal change or not ?
    It does, For sure.

    Where is sechels basic logic ?

    .

    #2274835
    ARSo
    Participant

    CS: My point was that the Alter Rebbe was referring to a small small sect of people, and even those don’t exist today, because the ones off, aren’t doing it because of their knowledge of Hashem and Yiddishkeit, but rather from their lack of it

    Do you have a (non-Lubavich) source that makes this distinction? I know that the velt says in the name of R Chaim Brisker that nebech an apikorus is still an apikorus.

    if you know aleph teach aleph

    That’s a lovely concept… in theory. In practice, however, it is very dangerous! If someone only knows alef, when he/she tries to teach it to someone else, that person can very easily be influenced who has harmful hashkofos which the teacher does not necessarily know is harmful. That is clearly the reason for so many children of shluchim and other Lubavichers going OTD Rachmono litzlon. (You’re going to deny that the numbers are high, but they are certainly MUCH higher than the attrition in other groups of chareidim.)

    Tznius is not its own Mitzvah doyraisa

    ??? Of course it is! Being machshil someone else is an issur d’Oiraisa!

    “Al yemin shehu smol veal smol shehu yemin , the rashi you mentioned is speaking about sanhedrin hagadol in yerushalayim where it is indeed prohibited to argue against”
    I don’t recall Rashi mentioning Sanhedrin, just quoting it in relation to our leaders. You’re welcome to correct

    The passuk itself is talking about the Sanhedrin! Look it up in parshas Shoftim.

    a soon to be giyores iyH who I had taught Chassidus on the basis of thinking she was Jewish, (I think I’ve heard Chassidus is ok to teach goyim too- they’re also obligated to believe in Hashem)

    You THINK it’s ok? Is that mean to justify what you did, albeit unwittingly?

    [the woman] told me that Chassidus had infected her so to speak- that when she is told about a mandatory class she needs to take for giyur and how it’s so amazing and deep, she’s found everything dry and basic (I’m talking hashkofa etc) after learning Chassidus

    You know you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel when you bring an anecdotal proof from a shikse!

    Being that that’s just #88 out of #200 complaints etc you’ll have, I don’t see the need [to provide a source]

    Now that is certainly a winning reply to a challenge for you to back up some garbage you wrote!

    #2274836
    ARSo
    Participant

    CS: I believe the context was how could The Rebbe say we should demand Moshiach? Point here was the chofetz chaim uses the same word- and he didn’t say ask nicely.

    I don’t clearly remember what the content of the complaint was then, but my complaint was and is that the LR said that what the RBSO is doing doesn’t make any sense. The Chofetz Chaim would never have said something like that.

    Many women who don’t dress tznius do it because they struggle with the image tznius clothing gives off, and feel non tznius clothing looks better on them etc. …

    I am broadminded enough to accept that people struggle with any mitzvah. But I am not broadminded enough to accept that women who do not dress tzniusdik can be shluchos. Nor am I broadminded enough to accept that non-tznius is de rigueur (please add that expression to the list of those that I only use in the Coffee Room) in Lubavich circles without the Rabbonim expressly issuing statements ‘demanding’ (as strongly as demanding Mashiach) that women shouldn’t be machshil the men who are innocently walking down the same street.

    Now of course, learning enough Chassidus on the topic, elevates one to a place where they feel disdainful towards non Jewish fashion, and feel that tznius is the look they are proud to wear, and the other clothing cheapens women and isn’t beautiful at all

    Not from what I and others have seen from Lubavich women. Don’t forget, it’s not only areas of the body that have to be covered, it’s the mode of dress as well. This, unfortunately, is a problem in a lot of MO circles as well.

    #2274924
    AviraDeArah
    Participant

    If someone finds any part of hashkofa “dry,” it’s not because of actual chasidishe Torah. It’s because they’ve had sensory overload, like children who find books boring if they watch movies. So if they hear fanciful ideas which don’t really make them feel a need to, say, cover up, and then they learn basic hashkofa about prishus min haarayos, they might find it “dry.”

    That’s just another reason not to learn kabalah until you’re ready for it. Even chasidim who say that regular jews can learn it through chasidus are referring to average Jews, like those of us here, who have a basic education. Not someone who has no idea how to read.

Viewing 50 posts - 651 through 700 (of 824 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.