January 23, 2011 9:02 pm at 9:02 pm #731085
‘”Yitia” -there are plenty of posters who appreciate your contribution and logic. I am privileged to be one those who read your words.’
As am I. Thank you.
When one side in an argument is presenting logical, well sourced expositions, and the other side is engaging in name calling, I know which side is most likely to be correct.January 23, 2011 10:04 pm at 10:04 pm #731086
popa bar abba- I have been reading many of your comments on these threads and most of the time, you are quite rational and instructive. But your assertion that there is no difference between d’oraisa and derabbonons (that is the gist of your post) flies straight into the face of every halocho. Did you know that there are more flexibilities with derabbonon than d’oraisas? An example- “stam jeinom” (a derabbonom) is bottul beshisha (1/6)- real jajin nesech (a d’oraisa) is not. There are a plethora of halochos in joreh deah that will use various ‘snifei hetter” if it is a derabbonon. How about the hilchos aveilus? we pasken that we go ‘lekuloh” because aveilus (after the first day)is derabbonon. And many,many others.
It is actually of crucial importance to know whether something is d’oraisia or derabbonon. it is not to say that one should not follow both in same fashion but there will be some very definite differences if covering a woman’s hair is only derabbonon, starting with the Aruch Hashulchan’s hetter.
I understand your feelinsg that you want to follow your ‘rebbeim’ of the past hundred years but you must understand that this is not how Poskim look at it. They have to go back at the origins of a halocho and understand the issues discussed. Another example: shaving on chol hamoed. The Nodah bejuehuda had to interpret a MISHNE to come to his conclusion. You cannot get earlier than that!
Nonetheless, I have found this thread very stimulating both in its discovery of various ways of looking at a certain halocho and at the people who are responding.January 23, 2011 10:10 pm at 10:10 pm #731087
Rabbi of Berlin:
A. I think you misunderstand my comment about d’oraisah and d’rabonon. I am well aware of the ramifications of something being d’rabonon. I was only criticizing an attitude I perceived of not caring about things which are “only” d’rabonon.
B. That is not the way poskim paskin. They look at the most recent and most accepted opinions. An opinion which is brought by the acharonim carries far more weight than one which is not.January 23, 2011 10:20 pm at 10:20 pm #731088
popa bar abba- on your second comment. Actually, NO. R’Moshe zz’l never paskened this way, and neither did many other Poskim. The GRO disputed the shulchan aruch in his Psakim and other Poskin disputed the REMO at times. An acharon cannot dispute a rishon but can-CAN- dispute any acharon and by the way, they often do. I do not agree with your way of looking at psak.January 23, 2011 10:43 pm at 10:43 pm #731089
rabbi of berlin:
I disagree with what you are saying, assuming I understand you correctly.
I don’t believe the proper way to paskin is to look at who you are allowed to argue with and then just take sides as you see fit. It is true that one is not an apikores if he argues with a rishon, but he is a fool.
If Rav Moshe occasionally took sides in a machlokes that was hundreds of years old, I am sure it was with a healthy respect for the hundreds of years worth of commentary which came in between.
I contrast this to a perception I have among some, which is to validate any opinion based on finding a random rishon on which to hang one’s hat. I don’t think that is what any real posek has ever done.
If that is not what we are discussing, then we agree.
(And thank you for the original compliment)January 23, 2011 11:00 pm at 11:00 pm #731090
ppopa bar abba- I don’t want this to become a private dialogue although I am enjoying it. Basically, there are two ways of making piskei halocho. You can be a ‘collector”-looking at all the previous Piskei halocho and then taking what is the most prevalent. This is what many poskim do today but in truth, it is intellectually dishonest, because they allow someone else to make the decision for them. It is, howeverr much safer, as few people will disagree.
The other-more difficult- way of giving a psak is to delve into the whole sugya and come to a conclusion regardless of what previous Poskim (obviously acharonim) said before. Shaving chol hamoed is a prime example. The Nodah Jejehuda was the first who came up with the hetter of shaving on chol hamoed (I am not going into the details now). Before him, it was always understood that you cannot shave but he saw a change in everyday life and adapted his psak. In a more extreme way, the GRO’s psak that the zemanin are from Netz to shekiah and mincha must be davened before shekia went against the mechaber and the remo.
There are many examples I can give you. The second way is much much more difficult because you are challenging certain precedents and people are afraid to challenge the status quo. This is why R’Moshe’s psakim were so attacked in the beginning. Obviously, when the dor sees you as a giant, then some of your piskei halocho become the norm.
Every possek- I assure you- respects the previous generations. And if Rabby Broyde- as mentioned, comes to a different conclusion, I am absolutely certain that he knows that he is puny compared to the previous gedolim. Nonethelss, he is allowed to give his opinions. So, every cogent argument is allowed. You don’t have to follow it but it is intellectually honest and others are entitled to follow that Psak. I thank you for this interaction.January 23, 2011 11:33 pm at 11:33 pm #731092
Any supporters to the opinion that such a lady is an apikores as per that Hungarian Ruv?
My point is that this is no way to pasken: digging up random shvere minority shitos or da’as yehids to justify pirtzos. This is the way of the early Reform in Deutschland, rabbiofberlin.January 24, 2011 12:01 am at 12:01 am #731093
“I don’t care what most frum people were doing 100 years ago”
You said otherwise in your earlier comment.
“The GRO disputed the shulchan aruch in his Psakim and other Poskin disputed the REMO at times. An acharon cannot dispute a rishon”
Rabbi, those two sentences are incompatible. The author of the S”A was a rishon. I presume you mean that usually an acharon does not dispute a rishon unless he has other rishonim to hang his hat on?
Yet there are even exceptions to that. What rishon ruled that women do not have to pray the shemoneh esrei, as the Magen Avraham rules? What rishon objected to the Radvaz’s paskening that the Ethiopian Jews were fully Jews with the status of Karaites? And I’m unaware of any support from anyone, rishon or acharon, for Rav Soloveitchik’s teaching gemara to women.
And Chas v’shalom we call the Magen Avraham or The Rov “fools”!January 24, 2011 12:05 am at 12:05 am #731094
So, after much back and forth, I am led to believe the OP really has an issue with $5000 and not 24-26 inches.January 24, 2011 12:15 am at 12:15 am #731095
rabbiofberlin, Charliehall –
Thank you for your support. I appreciate it very much.
It seems to me to be infected by the very things that mdd accuses.
I am not going to take issue right now with that generalization. Let me just say that I do think in some cases you might be right, but it depends on the posek/rabbi, and personally I think one could say the same thing for some ‘ultra-yeshivish’ rabbanim, (though of course to the opposite extreme) so I think it is not really fair to generalize like that.
However, ???? that that’s the way it is, like mdd describes; for arguments sake. I am bothered by the fact that he simply discredited everything I wrote without even reading it. I did not find an obscure rishon to rely on. I used standard sources and a regular approach to analyzing the sugya (by regular I mean that I am sure none of my rabbeim in the Mir, Ner Israel, or Lakewood would say I’m being ????? anything, and my much-more-“normal”-than-me chavrusas were also ???? to what I said), yet I get dismissed with a flip of the hand at best, because apparently I have an agenda.
I guess I am appealing to you because with all due respect to others on this site, I think you know better than most here, how to properly learn a sugya and pasken a shaila. So if you happen to have the time to read my lange drosho, let me know what you think.January 24, 2011 12:21 am at 12:21 am #731096
you have a good point but you are completely wrong. If a lady would be covering her arm with a more attractive arm that would be the same problem as covering her hair with more attractive hair. Wearing nice clothes isnt using more attractive erva to cover the ervah “
Chayav inish : You have a good point, too, but you also may not be correct. Respectifully, you would be correct if SHAITLECH were considered to be erva (like the more attractive arm that you mention). But they are not. Hair, unlike a bare arm, is NOT intrinsically erva. It is only erva when it is the hair of a MARRIED woman and takes on that status. But a bare arm is always erva, even in an unmarried girl. So your point, while understood, is not really based on comparable information.
Sorry.January 24, 2011 12:26 am at 12:26 am #731097
Brooklyn yenta its true that u can also get attention by doing somwthing weird but usually a lady that is wearing a shmata on her head although she will get attention nobody will be attracted.”
Not necessarily true. There are women who wear the most outlandish hairstyles, nose rings, tattoos, and yes, shmattas on their head, and some weirdo will find them attractive. Just look at some of the couples who walk down the street of Manhattan.January 24, 2011 12:33 am at 12:33 am #731098
There is a difference between D’Oraisa and D’rabbonon. The chiyuv is not the same, the onesh for being oveir on each is not the same, and the permissibility to suspend the latter is less strict than the former (in an emergency that is not pikuach nefesh).
Likewise, the chumros of our rabbonim, though we must observe what they tell us to do, are still not the halacha m’Sinai, but rather are gedarim that we follow to preserve the halacha m’Sinai. So there is a little wiggle room (as per our rabbonim) within some of those areas, as well (such cholov Yisroel).January 24, 2011 2:12 am at 2:12 am #731102
rationalist judaism is authored by a person the gedolei yisroel across the board have declared apirkorsus.January 24, 2011 2:59 pm at 2:59 pm #731107
bed stuy-have you ever learned the hakdomoh to nezikin by the Tiferes Yisroel?? i suggest you do, as you may be calling him an apikores too.January 24, 2011 3:59 pm at 3:59 pm #731108
LOL, you know how many times you have said this (and under how many names)? Must be a dozen at this point.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.