Eid passuled because of Iphone

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Eid passuled because of Iphone

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 51 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #604771
    The_Cool_Jew
    Member

    What do u think about the story that just happened in Israel with the Eid by a chuppa being passuled because of his Iphone? See here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/General+News/139247/Rosh-Yeshiva-Pasuls-Witness-at-Chupah-Because-of-iPhone.html

    #895154
    shein
    Member

    It was the right thing to do.

    #895155
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    Just out of curiosity, what are the halachic grounds for making this determination? Obviously, when the disqualifications were codified, Iphones did not exist. So, how were the classic disqualifications applied to apply to one who owns an Iphone?

    The Wolf

    #895156
    midwesterner
    Participant

    It was right to be malbin pnei chaveiro barabim like that?

    #895157
    shein
    Member

    If an eid is pasul he cannot be an eid for kiddushin.

    And I’m sure he told him quietly and privately. That it is in the media is likely because he told someone what happened to him privately, and from there it spread. (And still none of the reports indicate who it happened to.)

    The iphone has the capability to instantly and privately go to all strictly halachicly forbidden sites. And in Eretz Yisroel they have long been makpid to make sure the kehilla members do not have such a powerfully destructive device always on their belts.

    #895158
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    It was right to be malbin pnei chaveiro barabim like that? }

    I believe the news story said that it happened in private, before the chuppah.

    The Wolf

    #895159
    gregaaron
    Member

    If an eid is pasul he cannot be an eid for kiddushin.

    Well, that is certainly true – but is it relevant?

    That being said, the mesader kedushin at any wedding has the right to conduct it as he sees fit; as long as, as is being indicated, there was no public scene, I don’t have too much of a problem with it. Do I think it was the right thing to do? ?????? ????, no. But that’s the difference between a talmid chacham like him and a yokel like me who posts in the YWN CR.

    #895160
    arc
    Participant

    No one said a pasul Eid is kosher for kedushin? How does a phone equal a psul?

    Perhaps it’s true, perhaps it isn’t. I don’t like it.

    We are still pretending that the Asifa was a success.

    Is this pasul eid’s money good for donations? Maybe he sent an email on his Iphone and made money that way?

    #895161
    Ðash®
    Participant

    Traditionally, halachic rulings come from Poskim, not Roshei Yeshiva.

    #895162
    oomis
    Participant

    I won’t second guess a Mesadeir Kedushin, but on the face of it, if the iPhone is a problem for the reason given, then ANYONE on the internet (including ALL of the choshuveh men posting in the CR), should be likewise possul.

    #895163
    yehudayona
    Participant

    It’s my understanding that all sorts of devices, including iPhones, can be filtered. I also know that there are all sorts of “services” that are assur that are available from any phone, including your grandmother’s wired phone.

    #895164
    Sam2
    Participant

    Shein: How does owning an iPhone Passel someone L’eidus? I’ll give you a better question: Bring me a source that someone who actually looks at disgusting things on the internet is Passul L’eidus. You can’t. That doesn’t make someone Passul L’eidus. There is a list in the Shulchan Aruch (towards the beginning of Choshen Mishpat) as to who is Passul L’eidus. Owning an iPhone would not qualify someone under any of those categories. This Rov is just wrong and is probably Chayav to ask Mechilah for Ona’as D’varim.

    #895165
    shein
    Member

    The working suspicion is that someone who has immediate and private access to these horrible sites, is liable to be suspected as possible having visited these forbidden sites.

    #895166
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    The working suspicion is that someone who has immediate and private access to these horrible sites, is liable to be suspected as possible having visited these forbidden sites.

    A. As yehudayona pointed out, such things could be accessed any number of ways, including via an old-fashioned phone.

    B. So what? Is it wrong? Sure. But there are plenty of things that one can do wrong that don’t make one passul l’eidus. Why does this? How does this fit into the classically defined cases?

    The Wolf

    #895167
    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    shein- please,please check the gemoro berachos-currently the daf limmud- about someone whom you think made a sin in the day…you must accept that he made teshuvo- but you- not only don’t you accept that he may have made teshuvo- you imply falsely that he may have made a sin…this is outrageous and you should never think thast way again!what the messader kidusshin did was disgusting.

    #895168
    HaKatan
    Participant

    I’m glad to have seen this thread, only because I don’t have to disagree with many others, including ROB, on this one.

    Lifi Aniyas Da’ati, and those are the key words, I can’t understand how one is passul as an Eid just because he uses an iPhone.

    I tend to agree with the gist of what ROB said, which is that if a talmid chacham who sinned by day still merits “al tiharher acharav baLayla”, then even if a person did do some aveira with that phone (though there is no reason to assume he did so just because the device is capable of all sorts of things) then maybe he already did teshuva and is therefore just as kasher to be an eid as anyone else.

    Perhaps someone who knows can enlighten everyone.

    #895169
    Shraga18
    Participant

    It may have nothing to do with looking at forbidden things. In E”Y there has for many years been a clear psak, signed by gedolim of every stripe, litvish, chasidish and sefardi that having a non-kosher phone is forbidden.

    I don’t know the halachic parameters here, but I would think that the fact that the erstwhile eid felt he doesn’t have to listen to practically all the gedolim was a factor.

    #895170
    on the ball
    Participant

    As others have already pointed out, owning an Iphone is not mentioned in Hilchos Eidus as being a Poseil and even looking at inappropriate images is not listed.

    Therefore I am pretty sure that the Mesader Kiddushin was doing no more than trying enforce the Takanah against the internet and that he would readily agree that the person was not literally Pasul.

    #895171

    This is the best form of MO outreach. Nothing could be more successful in attracting chareidim than simply banning each chareidi person who owns any non-kosher device as posul.

    #895174
    BaalSechel
    Participant

    I think the comparison to the the Gemara that we assume the person did Teshuva is amusing. 1 who says this is a Talmid Chochom? Most people aren’t. 2 Just having an unfiltered Iphone, which has been decried by all Gedolei Yisroel as leading to terrible nisyonos, is both an aveira, and a chilul Hashem (it makes such an act “acceptable” to society).

    Probably the Rosh Yeshiva knew this fellow did not have a filter.

    If all Roshei Yeshiva would follow his lead, it would help diminish one of today’s biggest nisyonos.

    #895175
    akuperma
    Participant

    The headline is an example of “yellow journalism”. Saying an eid is pasul means you are holding that the marriage is invalid, such as when one is trying to prevent a child from being a mamzer or prevent a woman from being an agunah. These are legal rulings.

    Picking an eid for the wedding is a social activity, not really a legal one, and the Rav’s statement was political not halachic. If it were necessary to uphold the validity of a marriage (as occurs if the husband dies and one wants the surviving woman to be a widow rather than a girlfriend), I seriously doubt he would hold the marriage invalid.

    #895176
    TheMusicMan
    Participant

    I think that the Rabbonim nowadays are of the opinion that there is a Tzurech Sha’ah for these things. (Posted from my filterediPad. You have your Rav make your Restrictions password, and then shut off Safari. Then download the k9 filter off the App Store.)

    #895177
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    He was “Poretz Geder” and that makes him Passul. The fact that he had an IPhone is not the issue.

    #895178
    gregaaron
    Member

    The working suspicion is that someone who has immediate and private access to these horrible sites, is liable to be suspected as possible having visited these forbidden sites.

    First of all, as others have said, even if someone has visited these sites, one is obligated to assume that he has done ?????.

    Additionally, with regard to being a witness, we don’t really care what he does in private, as long as he hasn’t been doing shady things for the sake of money. Check out the ???”? mentioned above, and the ????? in ??????? of ???? ???? ?????? – every disqualification mentioned (other than ????) is regarding monetary suspicion, where we are worried that a witness may have taken money to testify.

    #895179
    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    Well, elijahu hanovi must be on his way “veheishiv lev ovos al bonim” and by extension, melech hamoshiach is soon here ! Imagine- HaKatan and I agree on something !! “Mi keamcho Yisroel”!

    #895180
    yehudayona
    Participant

    There’s a problem with the blanket prohibition against so-called non-kosher phones. AFAIK, kosher phones don’t allow texting. Voice-only phones are useless for deaf people. Which isn’t to say that they need smart phones.

    #895181
    frummy in the tummy
    Participant

    It’s highly important that these so-called jews who use iphones be ostracized and banned from the almost-Utopian society known as Eretz Yisroel. After all, peace, happiness, and supreme moral standards are defining characteristics of the people of this land. If only these rasha’im would part with these demonic devices, Moshiach would surely come. I’m so glad the ‘gedolim’ were perceptive enough to find this last bastion of evil residing in our midst and put an end to it.

    #895182
    Toi
    Participant

    I imagine this RY never even had a hava amina that this maaseh would be considered news to the people here at ywn. i think he meant to quietly give mussar to someone, showing him the seriousness with which the gedolim of EY have assured iphones. he is not terrible or disgusting; he cares about this guys neshama. daas balebatim doesnt change his intent.

    #895184
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Well then this Rosh Yeshiva should be passeled because he ignores the words of the Tanna; ???????????? ??????, ????????, ?????????? ?????????????, ??????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ????????? ???????? ????? ????????, ??????????? ?????????????? ????????? ?????????? ??????????, ????????? ???? ???????? ??????????.

    #895186
    squeak
    Participant

    I douht this ever happened. After all, the source of this story is worthless as an eid, so he probably also has no neemanus. Just like other pesulai eidus, such as women 😉

    #895187
    WIY
    Member

    Toi

    I blame YWN for posting this story without permission of the Rav and without writing his reasoning. I notice a trend of YWN posting stories that paint Rabbanim in a negative ligh and allowing very callous and chutzpadik remarks against Rabbanim. I dont know what has happened to YWN but its not the same as it used to be.

    #895189
    147
    Participant

    The way this Rosh Yeshiva Judged this fellow, he may have to fear that he’ll too be judged so scrupulously come R’H in another 11 days time.

    & if I had been the Chosson at that wedding, I would have immediately defrocked him from being Mesader Kiddushin, and asked another Rabbi to officiate.

    #895190
    computer777
    Member

    TO those who say, supposing he sinned, then we must assume he did teshuva is nonsense. If he did real teshuva – kabalah al he’asud – he would no longer have the iphone. (I’m not saying he did sin, but if he did, then he didn’t do what he can that it shouldn’t happen again.) Those that get caught in this web of aveira have a very hard time crawling out.

    #895191
    mdd
    Member

    Sam2, if he did look, he would be possul, at least, de’rabbonon.

    #895192
    Sam2
    Participant

    Mdd: You sure? I’ll check again, but what part of that Passuls him? I don’t think that’s the type of Ochel N’veilos L’tei’avon that Passels you L’eidus.

    #895193
    zahavasdad
    Participant

    One is not allowed to veer from the Torah Left or RIGHT. In the 1800’s many felt minor changes needed to be made and eventually reform was started. People seem very willing to critize changes on the left.

    However changes on the right can be just as damaging. People who make such “changes” on the right must be called out just as vigorously to prevent damage

    #895194
    takahmamash
    Participant

    If he did real teshuva – kabalah al he’asud – he would no longer have the iphone.

    Owning an Iphone is not an avayra.

    #895195
    repharim
    Member

    probably because the guy with an iphone has access to the internet…and we all know what kind of dirty things are there…so we assume this person does some bad bad aveyros…

    #895196
    nishtdayngesheft
    Participant

    I don’t think he said he is pasul for eidus, rather as mesader kidushin, he decided that he does not want this operson as an eid. Which as mesader kedushin seems to fall within his purview.

    #895197
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    probably because the guy with an iphone has access to the internet…and we all know what kind of dirty things are there…so we assume this person does some bad bad aveyros…

    And you have a functioning car, and we all know that a car can take you to all sorts of dirty places that you shouldn’t go to… so we assume that you’ve frequented these places.

    And you have functioning hands, and we all know that property is often left around just “asking” to be taken… so we assume you’ve done some serious stealing…

    And you have a knife capable of cutting through things, and we all know that a knife can be used to assault, injure or even kill people… so we assume that you have committed serious assaults and murder…

    Bottom line: the means to do something does not mean we can assume that that thing has been done.

    The Wolf

    #895198
    computer777
    Member

    Owning an Iphone is not an avayra.

    Maybe it is. Maybe it isn’t. That’s not the point. If he is did sin, then he belongs getting rid of it as part of his teshuva. If he doesn’t then it isn’t sincere teshuva.

    #895199
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    I don’t think he said he is pasul for eidus, rather as mesader kidushin, he decided that he does not want this operson as an eid. Which as mesader kedushin seems to fall within his purview.

    If that’s the way it happened, I would agree with you (although, were I the mesader kidushin, I would have investigated these things before the chuppah, rather than potentially embarrassing someone at the wedding itself — but that’s not the point we’re arguing). However, it’s reported that he disqualified him, not asked that he simply be replaced with another.

    The Wolf

    #895200
    lebidik yankel
    Participant

    guys I think we are all missing the point: the Rosh Yeshiva considered someone who is having an iPhone in defiance of the call of the rabbanim to get rid of them as someone who defies the poskim and has placed himself out of normative good standing. He did not want such a person as an eid. It could have been anything the fellow was doing that flouted torah norms. Its not about the iPhone.

    (You may argue that the call to get rid of all our iPhones is anyhow not being heeded or that it was based on inaccurate information or whatever. The point is that the Rosh Yeshiva did take it seriously)

    #895201
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    He did not want such a person as an eid.

    See my previous post. It hinges on how accurately the event was reported. It was reported as that he disqualified him. Do you have any information to the contrary (i.e. that it was a personal decision)?

    The Wolf

    #895202
    HaKatan
    Participant

    I’m curious what sanhedrin paskined that an iPhone is assur to have. Many rabbanim in chutz laAretz have them, so it can’t be assur to have.

    I do understand the concept of lo sasuru min hadavar asher yagidu licha, but maybe either his own daas Torah or his Rav’s permits having an iPhone. I still don’t see why he was disqualified from being an Eid Kiddushin.

    And to whomever said it was political and not halachic, how is it appropriate to make political statements at someone’s wedding, when that someone probably chose the eidim beforehand and now you go ahead and decide to jettison that pick?

    #895203
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    And to whomever said it was political and not halachic, how is it appropriate to make political statements at someone’s wedding, when that someone probably chose the eidim beforehand and now you go ahead and decide to jettison that pick?

    Personally, I think that it is within the MK’s rights to do so. Whether it’s appropriate to do so is another question.

    And certainly, such issues should have been clarified well before the wedding, to avoid potential embarrassments and to give the couple a chance to find another MK if they absolutely wanted this person as a witness. The couple should have been given the option ahead of time. At the wedding is not the appropriate time to start making non-halachic* (i.e. personal/political) objections.

    The Wolf

    * I was at a wedding once where the couple called up the bride’s brother-in-law as a witness. That’s an example of a *halachic* objection (since he’s ineligible).

    #895204
    oomis
    Participant

    Owning an Iphone is not an avayra.”

    response:

    “Maybe it is. Maybe it isn’t. That’s not the point. If he is did sin, then he belongs getting rid of it as part of his teshuva. If he doesn’t then it isn’t sincere teshuva. “

    my response to the response:

    That is exactly the point. If what he did was NOT an aveira, then what teshuva do you feel he has to be doing?????? Unless by ALL accounts owning these items is an aveira, there is no teshuva needed, sincere or not.

    #895205
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    Maybe it is. Maybe it isn’t

    Of course, even if owning an Iphone is an Aveira, so what?

    No one is perfect. We all have sins to confess on Yom Kippur. We’re all, to one degree or another, sinners. If you’re going to insist on a sin-free witness, there will never be a witness again in the world.

    The Wolf

    #895206
    nishtdayngesheft
    Participant

    Wolf,

    1) I believe it was already mentioned ealier by in fact, that it happened in private, so there was no issue of public embrassment.

    2) Stories like are really accurately reported, eyeroll. You are judging from the word passuled, which is a translation of something reported on an Israeli blog to assume what actually happened, rather than use seichel? You are better than that.

    #895207
    iced
    Member

    It’s not just the past sinning. It’s the active and ongoing sinning of have the device (and its sinful capabilities that the rabbanum in EY made a takana against.) Upholding the takana is legit.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 51 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.