Lubavitch Hats

Home Coffeeroom Bais Medrash Minhagim Lubavitch Hats

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 186 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1607140

    Phil
    Participant

    “I would think/hope also that would be the reaction of any never married man, besides Joseph I suppose”

    CS,

    Are you insinuating that Joseph has never been married? How can that be if he claimed on another thread that he has 3 wives and 27 children?

    #1607236

    Chabadshlucha
    Participant

    Oh my Phil, I think you take him too seriously. Your really believed that?!

    #1607238

    Joseph
    Participant

    Neville, ChabadShlucha, laskern: Are you saying that we don’t follow the Halacha from the aforementioned Shulchan Aruch? That’s how we’ve practiced life since Avrohom Avinu, when Sarah stayed in the tent when the visitors came, through Chazal through the Mechaber and beyond. If things are different now they became so only relatively recently and are only a b’dieved bshas hahchak, unfortunately due to yeridos hadoros. Ideally we should all return to the way things were and should be.

    #1607290

    laskern
    Participant

    Joseph, currently if we followed halacha literally, all jewish men would be divorced.

    #1607302

    laskern
    Participant

    I will repeat again. The Aruch Hashulchan 75:7 brings the Mordechai in the name of the Ravyeh that we rely on. Women go out to the street , for the reasons mentioned above, seeing them makes us get used to them and we don’t get affected like we find dancing with them was considered עץ בעלמא. For this reason no mechitza is necessary at a family dinner.

    • This reply was modified 1 month ago by  laskern.
    • This reply was modified 1 month ago by  laskern.
    #1607296

    Chabadshlucha
    Participant

    Joseph exactly the opposite. The world has changed for the better in this way. It is better that the mere presence of a woman in the street is not provocative any longer and she does not risk being kidnapped by some random noble (paroh by Sarah and onwards) etc. That was the world atmosphere that these halachos were applicable to. I hope you don’t disagree. Many things still need to change but this is one way the world has changed for the better.

    In any case its not we don’t hold by halacha anymore cvs. It’s just the circumstances have changed so the halacha is different and that is why you won’t find any Rav today talking about how often the woman should leave the home.

    #1607333

    laskern
    Participant

    CS, I think you meant to say Sarah by Pharaoh also Sarah by Avimelech, Rivkah by Avimelech and Dinah by Schechem.

    #1607320

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    Can we go back to talking about hats or something? This was one of the only good threads still active on the CR. I’m starting to wonder it Joseph purposely derailed it to protect Chabad’s image.

    I could use that in a “Joseph is a Lubavitcher” conspiracy theory thread. I can’t remember if I tried to make that already and it got blocked, or if I decided that it wasn’t worth hours of painstaking research just for a thread that would probably be blocked. Does that sound like the kind of thing you’d let through, mods?

    #1607342

    Joseph
    Participant

    Promiscuity has certainly increased since the time of the Mechaber, most unfortunately. This is certainly a bad thing. Historical kidnapping of women has nothing to do with anything mentioned. But anyone paying attention to the news even just over the last 11 months regarding contemporary mistreatment of women, knows that society in 2018 is extremely horrible in this regard. This is a direct result of the mixing of the genders at work, at school (even New York City public schools were gender segregated to some extent at one point) and in the street. Yes, women remaining at home like Sarah Imainu and as paskened by everyone before and after Chazal through Shulchan Aruch and later were absolutely 100% Torah correct and humanely correct based on normal and proper gender segregation norms. What we have today is a travesty, not better than the past, and far from the ideal. The ideal is what the Torah, Chazal and the poskim rule, as I earlier cited.

    The Aruch Hashulchan decries the phenomenon with women you described. He writes that since it became so bad, therefore it is permissible to say Shema in their presence.

    #1607377

    Phil
    Participant

    “What we have today is a travesty, not better than the past, and far from the ideal”

    Joseph,

    Aside from trolling the web, what do you intend to do about this travesty? Perhaps you should patrol the streets and threaten females with a club like your violent heroes, the self-appointed modesty police of Beit Shemesh. I’m sure that’s what the holy voices in your head are telling you to do and I know you’d really enjoy it. It would also make your 3 wives and 27 children very proud.

    #1607380

    Chabadshlucha
    Participant

    Joseph yes since the mechaber modesty has decreased. That has to do more with the mingling of women and men and the lack of importance placed on dressing and acting modestly and yes that should change. But women being treated as human beings and as equal members of society is a good thing.

    Also another way the world has changed for the better is that we now have many machines that do menial work. This has made a huge difference in everyone’s quality of life. In the mechabers time, it was normal for men to be away from home for months at a time working morning to night. For women this has made a massive difference to their workload.

    Laundry machines, fridges and freezers (no need to shop everyday and cook from scratch) dishwashers save hours of time. In the past, since there was enough work to keep a woman busy at home from morning to night, it would give her a bad reputation if she was seen outside, without good reason for hours everyday.

    Nowadays we also have Torah education for all boys and girls as well and women have time to become knowledgeable in Torah themselves which was mostly unthinkable throughout history.

    Historically women have always been encouraged to leave the home for good reasons among them : taking / accompanying their children / husbands to and from school / beis midrash (mentioned in Rambam and gemara), working so their husbands can learn / to help out with parnassa (the maharals wife was a shopkeeper), simchos or other social events (mentioned by the Rambam as one of the needs a husband must allow his wife to leave the house for.

    Just now more women are able to do more of that on a day to day basis. And women actually have time to smile at their kids as they play with them in the park.

    The Rambam mentions that even if a woman can hire out all her work because her husband is wealthy she should not sit idle all day as it is bad for her character. Today when women have many hours a week they could spare from house work, there certainly is no inyan to sitting in the house staring at the wall.

    Rather they take part in more of the above more often.

    So tznius of course applues nowadays just the discussion is about WHERE she goes, WHO and HOW she talks to people, WHAT environment she works in etc instead of how often she leaves the house

    I think any sane pertain is thrilled with these modern inventions that free up so much time to devote to better things and would not advocate returning to a time where you had to work day and night – men outside the house, women in the house just for survival.

    Neville so comment about the hats. Seems like they’re all covered.

    #1607378

    laskern
    Participant

    Joseph, the Aruch Hashulchan’s does not necessarily follow from saying Shema when hair is not covered to women who are dresssed tznuesdig. We can pasken not like him in his situation and still allow women to go on the street using the Ravye’s sevora above that we don’t get affected when we see them around because we become used to them.

    #1607421

    Chabadshlucha
    Participant

    Although if you really have nostalgia for the past Joseph as opposed to the majority of us who are grateful for the new reality we live in, all is not lost.
    You can join lev tahor or move to Iran where you may even be able to marry 3 wives. And they only leave the house in a burka. Just keep in mind before you make your choice that your wife will only wear black shapeless clothes. If that’s what you want then by all means go ahead

    #1607436

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    Ugh, you guys are fools. I’m sorry, but you can’t say I didn’t warn you.

    You can’t do stuff like admit that people are generally less tznius than 500 years ago in a discussion like this even if it’s true. Why? Because this whole thing got started from a totally innocent, non-controversial comment by CS about women being well put together (in contrast to the men) while ALSO keeping fully tznius (she specified the latter part several times).

    This was always about looking respectable vs. disheveled, and you let him make it about tznius. Now, you guys took the bait and your latest comments make it look like your making a mockery of hilchos tznius, which we all know isn’t your intention. Joseph wins the day as far as I’m concerned. You others should have listened when I said not to respond.

    #1607435

    Joseph
    Participant

    Neville, just FTR, I considered your point but don’t agree with it. I appreciated your concern. But the thread would’ve been historical already if not for the tangential OT sub-discussion. Only because of that has this thread remained active. You or anyone are still always able to bring it back on topic, should anyone so care; indeed, the fact that the thread is still active makes that more likely to occur than if it had already been buried and remained deep down and unseen.

    CS & laskern, you’re entirely incorrect. I have the Torah, Chazal and literally all the poskim on my side (as demonstrated and cited) whereas you only have your boich svaras on why things are or should be different and changed today than all of Jewish history from Avrohom Avinu until relatively very recently.

    #1607456

    laskern
    Participant

    Joseph, you are being ridiculous לכ”ת. The Mordechai in the name of the
    Ravye which is logical is not a boich svara. Women who go out dressed tzinuisdig do not affect man. The man are busy with their work and don’t stare and look at women who are not in any way provocative, For this reason a mechitza in a shul can be see through according to Reb Moshe. As mentioned before, we are more stringent when it comes to a Shul because the yetzer hora is stronger when there is holiness, but outside we follow the logic..

    #1607458

    apushatayid
    Participant

    Was in williamsburg last night, street was teeming with people. someone should quickly tell the neighborhood poskim that females of all ages were walking outside on bedford avenue. tell them quickly, so they can hang the kol korehs before shabbos.

    #1607462

    Phil
    Participant

    ” I have the Torah, Chazal and literally all the poskim on my side”

    Joseph,

    In your fevered mind, the entire Jewish world, including BP, Lakewood, Monsey, KJ, London, Manchester, Jerusalem and Bnei Brak, where females can be seen going to school, to work and walking in the street, are acting against your interpretation of Torah. Yet, the Gedolim, Poskim and Roshei Yeshiva aren’t constantly and publicly decrying this travesty. So what are you, the great zealot of our generation going to do about it, aside from trolling?

    #1607539

    Chabadshlucha
    Participant

    Neville apparently you didn’t understand the nuance
    in what I was saying. At least I think so otherwise I don’t understand your post. I guess you’re thinking that if I admit that society is less modest/ moral today than in the time of the mechaber, then that means egalitarian society =immorality which means that Joseph is right.

    But it doesn’t. The same way male dominated society doesn’t equal modesty (as seen from the ancient Egyptians, babylonians, Romans etc) egalitarian society does not automatically equal immorality and immodesty.

    We see this very well in the frum community where women freely go out, but don’t have long chatty conversations with men in the street and certainly don’t attend mixed parties etc. There are mens events and women’s concerts and events, there are shabbos tables where both sit together. There is a Yeshiva I know where there is a woman’s office for the women who work there. There are women’s businesses and there are frum midwives and nurses who work
    in regular hospitals. Where exactly to draw the boundaries is subject to the decisions of contemporary poskim who unilaterally agree on some things (like men not attending a womens show) and some things where they disagree (like whether to use girls voices in videos – not singing.) but egalitarian society can definitely work very well with modesty- and no one considers a woman leaving the house every day in this society, immodest

    #1607540

    Chabadshlucha
    Participant

    “CS & laskern, you’re entirely incorrect. I have the Torah, Chazal and literally all the poskim on my side (as demonstrated and cited) whereas you only have your boich svaras on why things are or should be different and changed today than all of Jewish history from Avrohom Avinu until relatively very recently.”

    Joseph firstly I referenced many other sources for what I was saying. Secondly its completely irrelevant. I can cite sources on polygamy and divorce without consent from today till tomorrow all over Torah etc. It makes not a whit of a difference since Rabbeinu Gershom made the gezeira against both. There is the basis and core values of halacha which never change but halacha very much adapts to circumstances and many times varies for different situations and people. What matters is what the masses of frum yidden do as supported by the poskim. The reasoning behind it we can discuss as I have attempted above. But the fact you can quote many sources from past times its irrelevant when the Torah authorities of today (and people with common sense who see context) don’t see it as an issue.

    As a matter of fact, the Rebbe held that the feminist revolution was in essence a positive thing and is preparing is for the times of moshiach which are also known to be more feminine. (He also stressed that the current expression of the feminist revolution was misguided because it encouraged women to be like men whereas true feminism is empowering and admiring women who live and value feminine values such as family over careers etc.)

    #1607639

    philosopher
    Participant

    Joseph, now I get why people call you a troll. You somehow manage to fardrei all discussions into arguments of why “according to the Torah” women are subservient to men, why women should stay in their homes” and other such Muslim practices. You shlep together sources thinking you are smarter than all Chassisha, Litvisha and Sephardishe gedolim who pasken differently than the greatest posek ever alive “Jospeh in the YWN Coffeeroom”.

    So either you are a troll and are just pretending to really believe in these ideas, or you are simply farikt. If you really believe in these ideas you need to join Lev Tahor ( who knows where they are now…) but they won’t let you have internet access. I can’t see you doing that. You’d rather women be deprived of their liberties than you of yours.

    #1607718

    Joseph
    Participant

    This week’s parsha:

    וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלָיו אַיֵּה שָׂרָה אִשְׁתֶּךָ וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּה בָאֹהֶל

    רבי מאיר משמיה דרבי מאיר (בראשית יח, ט) ויאמרו אליו איה שרה אשתך ויאמר הנה באהל להודיע ששרה אמנו “צנועה” היתה

    #1607657

    Joseph
    Participant

    Here are some “Muslim” practices, according to your definition, that not a single posek in the history of Torah Judaism has ever disagreed with. Not any Chasidish Litvish or Sephardic:

    Shulchan Aruch (EH 73:1): A man must give his wife clothing like women normally wear outside. A woman should not go outside much. The beauty of a woman is to stay inside – “Kol Kevudah…”

    Kesef Mishneh: A wife must give straw to her husband’s animals, but she need not give water. This is because normally one leaves the house to go to the river or spring for this, and “Kol Kevudah…” (a woman should not go out…)

    Rosh (Shevu’os 4:2): The Ri ha’Levi learns from our Gemara that we do not disgrace an honorable woman to go to Beis Din, due to “Kol Kevudah.” Rather, we send a Shali’ach of Beis Din to hear her claims. The Aruch and R. Chananel agree. The Ramban and Teshuvos of the Rif and Rav Sadya Gaon do not allow this. The Rif allows only that Beis Din send scribes to record her claim.

    Teshuvos Maimoniyos (Mishpatim 5): The Gemara (Nazir 12a) says that women are Kevu’os due to “Kol Kevudah.”

    Gemara: Mo’avim are forbidden “Because they did not go out to greet you with bread and water.” This does not apply to women. It is normal for men to go out to greet, but not for women.
    Objection (Do’eg): The men should have gone out to greet the men, and the women to greet the women!
    Question: How can we answer?
    Answer #1 (Chachamim of Bavel): “Kol Kevudah Vas Melech Penimah” (it is dishonorable for women to go outside, even to greet women).
    Answer #2 (Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael): We learn this from ” … Where is your wife Sarah?” (It is praiseworthy that she stayed in the tent.)
    R. Shimon says, “Because they did not go out …” – it is the way of a man …

    #1607730

    Chabadshlucha
    Participant

    Yes in that society it was dishonourable to go out unless there was an urgent cause, as it was a man’s world. In today’s society it is arguably dishonour able to make women stay inside with no good use of her time. Especially as women are expected to be seen out and about. Even if you would argue she shouldn’t be out without cause, there are many causes today that warrant her going out on a day to day basis so there’s no argument there.

    Regarding Sara Imeinu that was in her home (maybe a separate tent) the equivalent today would be not walking into a mans shiur being hosted in your living room and yes tznius women stay out of mens sections etc.

    #1607737

    Chabadshlucha
    Participant

    In any case i think I will now heed nevilles advice as it seems Joseph himself isn’t interested in discussion (as hasn’t responded to the points brought in response to him, just brings more sources to prove things that no halachic authority today endorses) and I mainly respond to these twisted posts to begin with to show that this is not Torah hashkafa for the sake of those people who may come across this and be misled / result in unnecessary chillul Hashem.

    Joseph if you post these things just to troll and generate more posts for the coffee room please consider choosing a topic less likely to create a chillul Hashem.

    #1607741

    Joseph
    Participant

    Not a single posek in the universe disagrees with the quoted Shulchan Aruch or any of the other poskim cited.

    #1607761

    DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Not a single posek in the universe disagrees with the quoted Shulchan Aruch or any of the other poskim cited.

    I don’t know about the single poskim, but i know a lot of married ones who allow their wives to go out.

    #1607781

    Joseph
    Participant

    No one said otherwise, DY.

    #1607795

    DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    And nobody denied what it says in Rambam or Shulcan Aruch, yet you keep quoting them.

    #1607794

    philosopher
    Participant

    Joseph, you said women should stay home like Sarah Imeini. You didn’t say women should not go out much.

    The fact is, today the most frum women, including Rebbetzins of big gedolim, go out shopping, to simchos, work, etc. “Much” is a relative term.

    Every frum women should go out when she needs to go out, regardless if the greatest posek ever “Joseph in the YWN Coffeeroom” approves of her going out or not.

    #1607803

    Joseph
    Participant

    DY: Mesdames CS and Philosopher have said that the Shulchan Aruch and Rambam cited no longer apply in our 21st century day and age.

    Philosopher: I absolutely said no such thing. I challenge you to quote any post of mine where I said that.

    #1607807

    laskern
    Participant

    It says in SA O”CH 75 דרכה לכסותה explains the MB s’k 2 כיון שרגיל בהן אינו בא לידי הרהור when he is used to see something will not attract him. Similarly, he is used in seeing women, they are not provocative and will not bring attraction to him.

    #1607810

    laskern
    Participant

    Anyway there is a Yerushalmi פיק חזי מה עמה דבר go and see how the people behave אע’פ שאינן נביאין אבל הן בת נביאין even though they are not prophets themselves but they descend from prophets.

    #1607812

    laskern
    Participant

    About changing halachas according to the circumstances see RMA SA O”CH 334:26 when it comes to putting out fires on shabbos.

    #1607835

    Phil
    Participant

    “Not a single posek in the universe disagrees with the quoted Shulchan Aruch or any of the other poskim cited.”

    Joseph,

    Please enlighten our sinful generation as to how the females in your family of 3 wives and 27 children implement your interpretation of halacha. Do they leave the house to attend school, work or shul? Are they allowed to go shopping or visit friends? How frequently can they go out and do they wear burkas when doing so? Instead of always criticizing others for not maintaining your high standards, you should be discussing how to implement them. Unless of course you’re just a nasty troll.

    #1607837

    DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Mesdames CS and Philosopher have said that the Shulchan Aruch and Rambam cited no longer apply in our 21st century day and age.

    Who is Mesdames?

    What does “no longer apply” mean and how does that differ from what today’s poskim allow and often encourage?

    #1607841

    Reb Shmuel Berenbaum related
    A couple of members of lubavitch were passing through the town of Mir in Europe. In Der Mir, the practice was that students did not wear their tzitzis on the outside of their clothes. On of those fellows asked one of the Mir bochrim “where are your tzitzis?” He received the rejoinder “here we don’t wear tzitzis (at all)”
    “Why not” was the query.
    The immediate quip was Talmudic diction ” ‘k’dei shelo levayesh mi she’ain lo’
    [ in order not to embarrass one who doesn’t have]”

    postscript

    What followed was a public condemnation of the Mir in chabad circles, circulating that the Mirrers do not wear tzitzis.
    R’ Shmuel chuckled and said that already in Europe we had trouble from them.

    #1607854

    DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Phil, why a the vicious personal attacks? Can you please point to the post where Joseph condemned anyone for going out? He expressed his opinion. You’re entitled to disagree, but this is ridiculous.

    I haven’t seen much in the way of actual content from you, just vitriol. It seems to me that you are a much bigger troll than Joseph ever was.

    #1607906

    philosopher
    Participant

    Joseph, according to all shittas you are wasting your time in the CR instead of learning Torah every moment in your life.

    You did mention that Sara Imeini stayed home all day and because of yeridas hadoros we women don’t stay home all day…

    Now, since you are a big posek on women’s issues, while disregarding your obligations, according to all shittas, let’s hear how many times per month according to you the Rambam meant women can out.

    #1607867

    Joseph
    Participant

    DY: TY. Mesdames is the plural of Mrs.

    Please provide actual quotes from today’s poskim on what they allow and encourage in order to better answer than question. I don’t think anything I cited differs from anything today’s poskim actually ruled.

    #1607869

    Phil
    Participant

    DY,

    Here’s one of many:

    “CS – Aba Chilkiya’s wife stayed home the whole day. (The Gemorah mentions this when explaining why she gave more tzedaka than her husband.) Which, not so incidentally, aligns with the psak in both Shulchan Aruch and Rambam that a wife should not leave her home too much. Rambam specifies a specific limit on the number of times per month her husband should let her out whereas the Shulchan Aruch doesn’t put an actual number other than to pasken not to go out much.”

    Joseph has repeatedly criticized our generation, calling what we have today a “travesty”, which no Posek or Rosh Yeshiva has done. Instead of finding fault with every single community, he should enlighten us as to how his own family lives up to his high standards. Otherwise, he simply enjoys criticizing other Jews for things he doesn’t keep, which is the textbook definition of a nasty troll.

    BTW, the YWN moderators recently labeled Joseph as a troll and a stalker:

    ““Moderators Note: Not only is a he a troll on YWN in the comments section, but he a confirmed 100% real life stalker, who has stalked many people through YWN. And no, this is not a joke.”

    #1607960

    laskern
    Participant

    Joseph, Don’t make yourself absent minded. I quoted Reb Moshe about the mechitza and the Mechaber with the MB in Siman 75.

    #1607970

    laskern
    Participant

    I repeat again it is currently a bigger problem if they go out seldomly then frequently as I quoted from the MB 75 that what men are used to doesn’t affect them. At the time of the Rambam they dressed in burka like outfit so it did not make a difference and it was better going out seldomly.

    #1608044

    Joseph
    Participant

    laskern: Neither Siman 75 (AH”S, Mordechia, etc.) nor the Halacha regarding mechitzas dispute or change anything I cited or said.

    If you feel otherwise please specifically quote what I said or specifically quote what I cited that you feel is disputed or changed by what’s brought by the AH”S, Mechaber, Mordechai, etc. But please specifically quote my post that you are disputing and how your maare mekomos dispute my maare mekomos.

    #1608103

    laskern
    Participant

    Joseph, the reason the women are limited in their out going so that the men should not get attracted. If the women go outside in a tzuniesdig outfit, according the MB 75:2 mentioned above , the men will get used to them, as the men have their own reasons for being outside, and the women will not create an attraction. Reb Moshe says that even in a shul the mechitza is only for separation and not for protection of looking at the women. So currently when the women have reasons to go out, we allow them to do so because the men become used to it.

    #1608122

    laskern
    Participant

    I disagree that currently we can keep women locked up as the Rambam himself states that they are not prisoners. They need to take out children to the park for health reasons, and for car pools on secular holidays when buses are not available. If they leave the house, they have a good reason to do so. The men do their own jobs and they will not be affected by the women provided they dress ztuniesdig.

    #1608147

    Joseph
    Participant

    laskern: Do you agree that it is wrong for them to be out, such as שפּאַצירן or cavorting, when there’s really no justifiable reason to do so?

    #1608166

    Phil
    Participant

    “Do you agree that it is wrong for them to be out, such as שפּאַצירן or cavorting, when there’s really no justifiable reason to do so?”

    Joseph,

    Do you let your 3 wives and 27 children out of the house to take a relaxing walk or visit friends, or do you consider that “cavorting, when there’s really no justifiable reason to do so”?

    #1608163

    laskern
    Participant

    yes, but their is always a justifiable reason. They don’t go out for the fun of it.

    #1608164

    laskern
    Participant

    Just as men go out for a reason so do women.

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 186 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Trending