- This topic has 153 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 9 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
apushatayid, at least you had the courage to admit that when a young husband stam holds his young wife’s hand strolling through the street it is indisputably derech chiba. Some posters are actually trying to subtly claim even this isn’t derech chiba. Obviously they just can’t fess up and admit wrongdoing.
Are those additional sources pre or post Rema? If they are post, they have no bearing on the current discussion of whether we must or do follow all piskei haRema. (which we don’t. Do you wear tefillin on chol hamoed? Rema pasken you do but GRA and previous chassidish poskim say not to) HOW DARE THEY DISAGREE AND DO OTHER THAN WHAT IS BROUGHT DOWN IN SHULCHAN ARUCH BY REMA. On a side note, don’t chassidei chabad follow the psakim of shulchan aruch harav and not the Rema?
The Gedolim in the days of the Shulchan Aruch and shortly thereafter have agreed to accept the psakim of the mechaber and the Rema as authoritative. The Shach writes that one cannot even claim “kim li” against a psak of the Shulchan Aruch. This is akin to accepting someone as your “Rebbi”, where you follow his psakim. The same thing applies to accepting the Shulchan Aruch and Rema.
Kasha,
you already stated that. It is a fact that we don’t follow 100% on everything brought down. Do you wear tefilin on chol hamoed? Plenty don’t which is farkert from Rema. How can that be if Rema is authoritative?
Myfriend: I didnt say it, nor did I mean to imply it. I am not issuing a psak for anyone.
Kasha, I will tell you why my husband holds my hand when we walk down the street. It is because I have difficulty walking, and by holding my arm and hand, it helps to steady me when I have to walk a few blocks. No one knows that, when they see me walk down the street with him. And you know what – it is not their business or anyone else’s, for the matter, with all due respect. And one could argue that there is definite chibah on the part of my husband when he is assisting me to walk, but it is not the chibah that the Torah means when it discusses inyanim of tznius. There is chibah and there is chibah. Most people know when someone is crossing a line of appropriate behavior in public.
“but it is not the chibah that the Torah means when it discusses inyanim of tznius. There is chibah and there is chibah.”
Really?? Where is this brought down? In Sifrei oomis1105 HaKodesh?
“Most people know when someone is crossing a line of appropriate behavior in public.”
Indeed. And hand holding and other acts of public affection are way above that line.
I did not bother to read all the comments, I did not find them very stimulating. However, I suspect that the title of this thread is very appropo of the story. I figure the story probably falls into the category of making stuff up.
“Really?? Where is this brought down? In Sifrei oomis1105 HaKodesh?”
It is brought down in the same sefer the connotates that Rema is authoritative and we can’t variate one iota.
The Gedolim, including the Shach, shortly after it was written accepted it as binding. This is the same thing that happened when Klal Yisroel decided that the period of Chazal has ended after the 7th generation of Amorayim (Mar Zutra, Mar bar Rav Ashi, etc), and nobody from here on in can add to the Gemora. There was no “halachah lmoshe misinai” that told us that the Gemora was sealed; it was the accepted reality told to us by our Gedolim. The same thing applies to accepting the Shulchan Aruch and Rema.
And yet you continue to ignore the fact that we don’t follow Rema 100% of the time. Please address the fact (specific cases were provided earlier). btw, if I remember correctly there are numerous instances where Shach does not pasken like Rema, if that is the case, how can it be binding? (at least according to your literal understanding)
this is a very inappropriate topic to be discussing in an open forum like this. It does not belong on YESHIVA world news. Moderator I think you should close and delete this thread. Keep in mind there are some young teenagers who come to the coffee room too. although everyone is anonymous it’s completely inappropriate and untzniusdig to be discussing your marriages.
Am I the only one who holds hands with many people? My kids, my mother, my sisters, my friends…
My husband and I are in Florida this week. We took the kids to Disney World, we held hands at certain points so we wouldn’t get lost from each other.
Looking at your spouse in public can have more of a chibah connotation sometimes than holding a hand.
There can be inappropriate gesturing or public fondness without touching too.
Many Yarei Shamayim, for that reason, won’t call their wife’s name in public.
Back to the opening of this thread.
“Mind you, we’re not talking about putting her picture on a billboard or on a magazine, but just hanging on the wall of my own house. Nonetheless, he said, it’s forbidden.”
See page 252 of Artscrolls Biography of R’ Moshe. There is a portrait photo of R’Moshe and his Rebbetzin. If it was 100% assur to hang such a photo in ones home, is it not that much worse to then take the same photo and print it in a book that would be sold to thousands of people and read by even thousands more? there are similar such photos in the book as well as in other biographies. If it IS Assur, perhaps this person should explain that to the folks at Artscroll so that they wont be nichshal so many people.
“Many Yarei Shamayim, for that reason, won’t call their wife’s name in public.”
when I was a bachur, I used to eat quite often by a family. It took me perhaps 8-10 visits to the home before I realized that the Mrs.of the home was not named “Herna” by her parents 🙂
No one said its “100% assur”. It can be different whether we are talking about a Yarei Shamayim or not. One can technically fulfill his obligations with minimum standards too. As far as the book, was the Rebbetzin “posing” for the photo, or did someone just snap it? Was Reb Moshe aware, and approved, using it in the mass media? Artscroll is not a Rov or posek nor a raye.
“when I was a bachur, I used to eat quite often by a family. It took me perhaps 8-10 visits to the home before I realized that the Mrs.of the home was not named “Herna” by her parents :)”
apushatayid, come to think of it, my Rov A”H (who is a tzaddik nister from 2 generations ago and was a Rov in Europe before the war) would always say “Hernor” (or something like that) when trying to call his wife upstairs (the Bais Medrash was downstairs and his house upstairs), when there were people around him. He never publicly called her by first name in public. I always assumed “Hernor” was Yiddish for “Hello” (not literally but figuratively; I think it means “hear” literally). Is that what it is?
We have so much to learn from the zekenim of yener dor. We just need to open our eyes, ears, and heart a little bit. (I’m speaking to myself foremost about this.)
This business of not calling a wife by her first name comes from a segulah. There is a segulah(no, I don’t know the source if anyone can help me out here please) for aruchas yomim if you don’t say her name.
That brings many to say “hernor”(hear please) to get their wife’s attention.
But this is really not common practice.
I for one, want my husband to live until 120, but I wouldn’t exactly appreciate being called hernor…
If that is the case YOU should insist on not being called by your first name in public. Arichas Yomim is certainly worth it.
Anyways, I hadn’t heard that it is a segula, but stam tznius. And its more widespread than you may think (although in the previous dor it was even more widespread.)
Myfriend: I am NOT bringing a raya from Artscroll 🙂
It is a POSED photo, it looks like it was taken at a simcha. Both are posed and smiling for the camera. They are VERY aware it would seem that someone was taking their picture (I would find it hard to believe that someone “happened” to get a picture that looks like a portrait.
Regarding “herna”, it is really 2 words “herr” and “nach” (I believe is proper pronunciation) or in english, “listen up”.
He would say things like “herna, more cholent?” or “herna, we ready for dessert?”
The point I was making and did not make very well, is that while trying to be a yareh shamayim, or perhaps take advantage of this segula, he called his wife as if she were the cleaning lady. Now I made the point a bit clearer.
apushatayid: Like myfriend said, when you take a Chasuna photo you don’t expect to see it in the newspaper or mass distributed. Theres nothing to indicate anyone in it approved of its later usage. I didn’t see anyone here say photos are 100% assur.
As far as hernor, I’ve also heard Rabbonim use that when calling their Rebbetzin, and smartcookie correctly translated it (hear, please). (I believe smartcookie previously identified him/herself as a native Yiddish speaker?)
“hear please”?
I guess it is the equivilant to the english “excuse me for a moment?” instead of “listen up”.
You think Artscroll got a bootleg photo and put it in the biography? You dont think it came from the family for the purpose of having it placed in the book? However they obtained the photo, do you believe they did anything wrong by publishing it? Is there anything wrong with looking at the photo? Is it different if it hangs on the living room wall for all to see?
You are dealing with the idiosyncrasies translating Yiddish to English. The effective meaning of the Yiddish expression is “hear me please”, as understood by a native English speaker.
Rav Moshe was already niftar by time that book was printed. Whether some family member or someone else who had access to it provided, doesn’t necessary provide Rav Moshe imperatore to it. Again, no one said stam photos are necessary 100% assur as a rule.
I’m never said, nor implied that Rav Moshe approved of the photo in the book. What I did say is that it is a posed photo of Rav Moshe and his Rebbetzin and that it was published by a reputable source who knew (or at least hoped) it would be read by thousands of people. What does it prove? Nothing. What does it imply? The publishers of the book did not think any issue of “displaying a photo of a married couple in a place where all could view it”. The relevance of this last sentence? Please read the opening to this entire thread.
Wolf – What I “think” is irrelevant. Who cares what *I* think. I am mevatel my thinking to our Chachomim.
There are also missing subtleties here. A lovey-dovey photo of a couple is problematic for public consumption (in addition to even be taken in the first place), whist a serious photo may not be. (Since you are asking for my thoughts.)
Kasha,
I think it is wonderful that you are mevatel your thinking to our chachamim. To take this discussion full circle, where have our chachamin stated that it is 100% assur for a married couple to hang their photo in their home? That is the question thewolf has asked. No source was given. I added that not only does it not appear to be not assur or even frowned upon, but reputable publishing companies publish these photos for thousands to see. Is Artscroll a psak halacha, of course not, but its not the point I was trying to make.
subtleties my friends, subtleties.
How do you generically define subtleties??
I haven’t seen the photo being referenced, so I cannot respond. But for the umpteenth time I repeat, no one on this thread (as far as I recall) claimed photos are 100% assur.
I wonder, does everything need to be written somewhere for it to be so? (We always hear about the “fifth chelek”.) Is it appropriate for a Yid to burp in public, if it isn’t written somewhere otherwise?
Kasha: You are avoiding the question.
(I am not Thewolfs tag team partner but would like to ask as well) Did Artscroll violate anything in the “5th chelek” by publishing the photo?
Can I get back to you after I get the 5th chelek to look it up?
“If that is the case YOU should insist on not being called by your first name in public. Arichas Yomim is certainly worth it.”
Now I know that a) kibud av v’em and b) shiluach hakan a re mitzvos that guarantee arichas yamim. I had not heard that not being called by my first name in public would guarantee that, too.
What posuk was that in, btw?
smartcookie, who mentioned that segula, asked for the source. In any event, it is a midas tznius by yarei shamayim as many people above testified personally witnessing Rabbonim and other yarei shmayim practicing this midda tova of not calling their wife by her name in public.
Oomis- it doesn’t guarantee you aruchas yomim, but I did hear it’s a segulah. Donno source, sorry!
Ill try to ask around tomorrow IY”H!
“In any event, it is a midas tznius by yarei shamayim as many people above testified personally witnessing Rabbonim and other yarei shmayim”
How do we know that this is being done for reasons of tznius and not something else? There was a time when ALL people in the USA referred to each other (even married couples) as Mr. or Mrs. So-and-So EVEN WHEN SPEAKING TO EACH OTHER. It was just their way. Many Rabbanim simply refer to their wives as Rebbetzin. That is their prerogative, but it does not make the name an untzniusdig thing.
There was a story of a talmid who went to his rebbie’s house for a Friday night meal and watched with awe as his rebbie ate exactly four spoons of soup from his bowl and no more. The talmid did likewise, because clearly there was some mystical reason for eating only four spoonfuls and no more, and of course, most of his soup was left in the bowl. After dinner, he approached his rebbie and asked him, “Rebbie, I noticed that you ate exactly four spoonsful of soup tonight. Please tell me, what is the significance of doing that? Is it kabbalah, or a segulah?” to which the rebbie replied, “I used a bigger spoon than you did.”
Sometimes there is a very simple reason for things that we observe gedolim doing, that has nothing to do with halacha, but is just a personal thing. I am not saying this is the case here, and there MIGHT be a tznius inyan for them, but maybe our Gedolim feel the need to behave a little more formally than the rest of us.
It could also be societal/cultural as well.
That’s what it is.
Like “hear nor” as smartcookie pointed out, is an accepted pratice by some ultra-Chassidishe couples. It is a “tznius” way of calling one’s wife in public. Walking behind the husband is an accepted practice of some Viznitzer couples (I’ve only seen that in Monsey).
In the opposite spectrum, a picture of a couple hanging on the wall could be an accepted practice in some frum circles.
I don’t think a picture of a couple hanging on the wall is an halachic inyan just like calling one’s wife “hear nur” in public, is not an halachic inyan. It is more of an “accepted” or “not accepted practice”.
The question is where is the fine line that divides the frum communities with those communities that call themselves religious Jews, but are not accepted by most frum communities as practicing the ideal way of Yiddishkeit? I’m not just talking about raw halacha. I’m talking about practices in all aspects of are lives that are subconsciously adopted by Yidden.
Judging other Jews for hanging up a picture of themselves and their spouses in their living room, which is accepted in some circles, is ridiculous. On the other hand, where does the accepting stop and the judging start so that we don’t end up accepting rabbas and the like who call themselves MO?
so that we don’t end up accepting rabbas and the like who call themselves MO?
Not all MO people accept Rabbas. Its actually an extremely small LW majority.
EDITED
Not all MO people accept Rabbas. Its actually an extremely small LW majority.
I specifically did not say “like THE MO’s” as in all MO’s are of that opinion. That’s why I said “like those who CALL themselves MO”.
“It could also be societal/cultural as well.”
When our gedolim make a decree they dont do it becuz of culture. What goyish culture does doesnt mean anything to us. if they dont call there wifes by there first names than its because thats what the Torah wants of them (and us). It has nothing to do with goyish culture or goyish society.
Mosherose, if that were true, please explain why we Jewish men don’t dress the way they did in the desert.
“if they dont call there wifes by there first names than its because thats what the Torah wants of them (and us). “
If it actually said that in the Torah or the Talmud, I would agree. Please show me the exact place and quote where it does, and I will not say another word on this subject.
When our gedolim make a decree they dont do it becuz of culture. What goyish culture does doesnt mean anything to us.
mosherose, you didn’t have to send that thought to the coffee room with the baal agaloh. You could’ve done it an easier way through the internet, although I know you don’t like to take advantage of goyishe influences.
“dont do it becuz of culture”
Cultured people spell it because. Those influenced by the culture spell it becuz 🙂
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.