- This topic has 233 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Benignuman – I will try to look at the Bais Yosef when I have a chance. Thanks.
One can ask a non-Jew to do an issur d’rabbanan for the sake of a mitzva or great need (SA OC 307:5). According to most opinions using electricity (other than incandescent lights) is such a prohibition. Some claim that Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach even said that really there is no prohibition but minhag Yisrael is to be machmir.
So far as the extra weight question is concerned see “The Shabbat Elevator” by
Rabbi Yisrael Rozen (on-line). As for the sensor, if the non-Jew enters with the Jew and is first I would imagine that the Jew did not do anything (and the non-Jew did it for himself). See also “When May I Ask a Gentile for Help on Shabbos? Part II” by Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff (also on-line).
benignuman: “The question is how far you can go theoretically. I don’t know.”
So as far as you know, anything leaving anything above the elbows/knees uncovered could be considered as going too far outside halacha.
(Our last posts crossed.)
Avi K,
Missed much of the proceeeding thread
You usually could find,if you desire to, one abberrant shitah and trumpet it
Presumably,you are aware of those who hold it is Boneh and other issurim
Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach’s son R’Shmuel was asked how come he is so more right wing/stringent than his father was
His response:We heard what our father said in the kitchen when the doors were closed
‘the extra weight question is concerned see “The Shabbat Elevator” by
Rabbi Yisrael Rozen (on-line)’
Rabbi Rozen is useful perhaps when Bsha’as had’chak, hardly normative
He has been over the years has been sidelined by leading Poskim
GAW: “L’maase, you were quoting someone quoting Rav Moshe, you did not (yet) look it up inside. It may be worth your while (as you seem to agree) to assume that the person (even if a Talmid Chacham) quoting does so selectively at best, or with and agenda. Look at the sources yourself and come to your own conclusion”
I agree that it is always best to look things up inside. I do think though that there is a very big difference between someone “quoting” a source, and actually bringing the source. Rav Ellinson brings the actual sources. While it may be somewhat preferable to actually look up the sources myself, I don’t think it’s THAT different. It is like going to a shiur where they bring source sheets as opposed to actual Sefarim. It is certainly not in the same category as quoting someone who is simply quoting a source (or cutting and pasting from Frumteens, whatever that is).
I also do tend to trust Rav Ellinson, because he is someone who brings sources and does bring a variety of opinions, and doesn’t simply say things like, “All the Gedolim say…” like some Sefarim do, without listing sources or even explaining who exactly “all the Gedolim” are.
That being said, I do think it’s preferable to look things up myself if possible, but I have no problem trusting R’ Ellinson’s sources until such time as I am able to find the sources myself.
GAW: “LUL – You do have the more difficult task.”
Actually, the reason that I have the more difficult task is that it’s harder for me to get ahold of sefarim since I can’t just walk into a shul and use their Sefarim, my own Sefarim collection is limited, and half my Sefarim are in the US.
“Many Rishonim and Achronim quote others as support for their shittos, and when you look inside the actual source, they said no such thing.”
I have a problem with this statement. If you are talking about someone contemporary, I could understand it. But I have a hard time seeing how you can claim to understand a source better than a Rishon.
“Finally, I’m glad that you agree that 4 inches is not Halacha. A certain “Rabbi” supposedly put out a letter that wearing a skirt that is less that 4 inches below the knee is just as Assur (“no less forbidden”) as eating Treif or going mixed swimming.”
IF it IS true that it is impossible for a skirt to fully cover one’s knees in any position unless it is at least 4 inches below the knees, then that statement is correct. As I said, I have never measured a skirt and I have no idea how much 4 inches is. But it does make sense that it may be the case.
I think most people don’t realize that if you want to make sure that your knees never show, then your skirts really do need to be way below your knees. The main thing that bothers me about those kinds of statements is that girls are misled into thinking that if their skirts are 4 inches, they are fine, and they may not be.
I guess the reason people got into the 4 inches thing in the first place was because girls thought they were fine if their skirts covered their knees in the front while they are standing still. Many people nowadays are not sensitive enough to know how to figure out if something is tznius unless they are given a measurement that can be measured with a ruler instead of using their seichel.
Personally, I have more of an issue with the idea that your skirts can’t be too long, and I plan to start a movement on behalf of long skirts. Halevei that everyone should wear long skirts, imho!
“It is critical to know what is Halacha, Chumra and Geder.”
Maskim 100%! I am a big believer in that.
“Being Dan L’Kaf Zechus, I assume the letter is a forgery, but some people really do think as such.”
I saw a letter on a busstop recently that someone had written to R’ Chaim about the fact that the high school his daughter wants to go to said they will only accept her if she starts wearing shorter skirts (I think that means not longer than mid-calf or something like that). R’ Chaim said that chalila she should wear shorter skirts even if she won’t get into high school.
When I told a Rav I know about this, he laughed and said that these letters are usually forgeries (he agrees with the idea that long skirts are a problem).
“I do not know Rav Ellinson (from whose sefer you quoted), but I will be Dan L’Kaf Zechus that he brings down both shittos.”
He actually does, but he brings the other as a minority opinion, and my impression was that there are no contemporary Poskim who hold that way.
That is the main issue I have with the sources you are quoting. While I am happy to do more research and look up these sources (as soon as I can get ahold of them), at the end of the day, if no contemporary Poskim hold that way, it is irrelevant what the Beis Yosef or other Rishonim say. There are many opinions in the Rishonim that we don’t go by, and the fact that someone can find a support in a Rishon for a certain action does not make it okay.
In fact, I have been wondering if that is the issue with OO and Avi Weiss. I would imagine that Avi Weiss is not the type to do something out of nowhere without finding a source. I thought that the issue might be that one can’t just find their own sources and posken against all the contemporary Gedolim. That is why Daas Torah is such a critical component of Torah Hashkafa. The entire halacha system is based on it.
Joseph,
We have a Gemara/Mishna that says covering arms is Daas Yehudis (i.e. minhag of tznius) and if a woman frequently violates this Daas Yehudis she can lose her Kesuba (according to some because this gives the man a right to be choshesh for znus). Now in our modern day American secular culture people can do what ever they want, but there are still judgments made and manners of clothing that are considered modest or immodest. Just dressing immodestly is not considered to be bad thing unless it is in an inappropriate place like the office or a funeral. Boruch Hashem, the standards of modesty in the Modern Orthodox world are higher than the secular American world.
The key for Daas Yehudis is that the mode of dress cannot be viewed within the community as immodest. When a woman wears clothing that within the community is viewed as immodest she violates Daas Yehudis and her husband has a right to divorce without a kesuba.
So long as there is a difference between modest dress and immodest dress, those who dress modestly will be within the bounds of Halacha (presuming of course not like the Mishna Berurah and those that hold that Daas Yehudis can’t change l’kula from the Gemara). The problem is if a society ever reached a point where there was no difference between modest and immodest. I don’t know what the halacha would be in such a circumstance. Fortunately, that is not the situation in any frum Jewish community.
Benignuman, Rav Moshe says (IM EH 1:114, 4:32) that that does not apply in a community where women disregard the requirement. According to “Nefesh HaRav” Rav Soloveichik held the same view.
LUL – except here, Rav Moshe is someone one whom you can be Somech.
I have a problem with this statement. If you are talking about someone contemporary, I could understand it. But I have a hard time seeing how you can claim to understand a source better than a Rishon.
In most circumstances it is quite obvious. Sometimes the Girsah we have is very different, and sometimes the shittah is trying to defend their p’shat. In either case, most of the “Classic” Rishonim by these types of Machloksim have shittos that understand them both ways, and we the reader have to interpret the way we understand best.
I think we are in a good place here. Yasher Koach.
Avi K,
I didn’t see that in my edition of the Igros Moshe. Can you point me to the line you are referring to. It seems to me that in Even HaEzer 1:114 he says the opposite.
That being said, my point was that they are not disregarding the idea of dressing modestly, they just have a different definition of what is modest. So they cannot be said to have disregarded the requirement.
benignuman, if their definition of modesty includes sleeveless in the streets/office, and their community views that as modest (but if it goes uncovered more than to the shoulder then immodest) whereas the secular American world has an even lower definition of modesty in this regard, you see that as halachicly okay?
Joseph,
Yes.
benignuman, replace sleeveless in my above comment with miniskirt, and still yes?
I don’t want to be part of a congregation that forces someone with a same sex attraction to be abstinent or marry someone of the opposite sex
Hashem is the one forcing them.
DY: “Hashem is the one forcing them.”
+1
“It is not the same as other attractions that we have laws against.”
Who says?
There are many people who are forced to be abstinent for many reasons. What about all the singles? And mamzerim? (while technically, there are ways that mamzeirim can get married, they are not so practical, and are therefore probably irrelevant for most mamzeirim). And what about agunos?
Life is hard. Good morning, America. And there are many things in life that are much harder than that. What about all the people who went through the Holocaust? What about all the kids who are abused and/or molested (and this category probably includes most or all people who are gay, btw)?
GAW: “LUL – except here, Rav Moshe is someone one whom you can be Somech.”
Benignuman: “I didn’t see that in my edition of the Igros Moshe. Can you point me to the line you are referring to. It seems to me that in Even HaEzer 1:114 he says the opposite.”
GAW, This ^ was my point. I did look at Igros Moshe inside on Motzei Shabbos and it was the same inside as it was in R’ Ellinson’s sefer. I still don’t see what you are saying. He says the opposite. The only thing that is more meikel because of society is saying K”S in front of a woman with uncovered hair.
I don’t have the Igros Moshe at home, but if you tell me the volume and page # where this Teshuva is (as well as the line you are referring to), I can look it up in hebrew books. Thank you.
I don’t believe that Hashem would do that.
It’s a clear pasuk in the Torah.
I know it doesn’t matter what I believe. Still would Hashem rather that so many Jews commit suicide chas v’shalom, go otd, or live in misery?
No, he wants them to overcome their temptations and live productive lives.
DY: “No, he wants them to overcome their temptations and live productive lives.”
+1
GAW: “lilmod ulelamaid – Joe is known to cut and paste from Frumteens”
Just for the record, I’m not Joseph. Never have been and never will be 🙂
lightbrite, I think I understand what you mean. It’s hard to understand how God could create such a challenge in a person that could never be actualized. But there’s an important difference between Open Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy. We ask what God wants out of us, they seem to say the opposite. Where they change halacha to suit themselves, we change ourselves to fit the Torah. Part of how we’re still around is because we never changed our religion to fit the world around us, the lesson not to do that is what we can take out of Chanukah. The other sects of Judaism (Reform, Conservative, etc.) that changed the religion are declining in numbers drastically, and a secular study shows that years in the future, Orthodoxy will be the only remaining functioning Jewish sect in America. To look elsewhere, l’havdil, the pope changed Catholicism to fit “modern times” and numbers are declining there, parishes are closing, and I heard from a Christian man just yesterday, that he’s destroying the religion. We cannot change religion to suit modern times, we must change our attitude towards it. I believe the question of homosexuality in Judaism to be a different discussion.
LB – You are a wonderful, spiritual person who has a lot of Ahavas Hashem and is working very hard to grow closer to Hashem and to do the right thing.
But it seems to me that you have a hard time with the concept of bending your will to Hashem’s Will and not trying to change His Will to fit with your own.
While Loving Hashem and having a positive attitude are very important, it is at least as important to remember that our purpose in life is to be “Ovdei Hashem” – to serve Hashem and to be willing to do whatever He wants us to do, no matter how hard it is.
What if Avraham Avinu had said, “How could a loving G-d possibly tell me to sacrifice my son? This makes no sense!” He would have been well-excused for thinking that and refusing to go forward with Akeidas Yitzchak.
If he had done that, where would be today? We are around today in his zchus. We daven to Hashem in the zchus avos (merits of the fathers). What does this mean? Why should Hashem favor us because of what our ancestors did?
It is because we have inherited their spiritual genes. Avraham’s sacrifice gave us the potential and ability to make similar sacrifices. Hashem is not asking us to do what Avraham Avinu did, but He asks us to make similar sacrifices, each on his own level. Different people have different challenges; some are harder and some are easier. Hashem gives greater challenges to those who are greater because He knows they can handle it and they have the ability to reach greater heights. The greater the challenge, the greater the reward in the end, and the greater the accomplishment, and the greater the person will feel in the end when they overcome their desires in order to bend themselves to Hashem’s Will.
We all have challenges, and we all have opportunities to serve Hashem by bending our will to His.
LB – I don’t know if you saw my earlier post. By the time it was moderated, you had already posted your next post, so it might have gotten missed. I wanted to make sure you see it, so I am posting the link”
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/open-orthodoxy/page/4#post-642352
LUL – Even HaEzer 1:69
GAW – Thanks. My question was: What volume of Igros Moshe is it in? And on what page?
If I had an Igros Moshe, I could find it myself. But since I don’t, I will have to look in hebrewbooks, and I find it hard to find things there if I don’t know the exact volume (and preferably page number). Thank you.
Lilmod,
I was referring to Avi K’s citation to Igros Moshe, not GAW’s. With respect to losing one’s kesuba, Rav Moshe says it explicitly even for the d’Oraisa of hair covering. Arms and other body parts that are just minhag is a kol shekein.
“With respect to losing one’s kesuba, Rav Moshe says it explicitly even for the d’Oraisa of hair covering.”
He says they don’t lose their kesuva, but he says they are still doing something wrong.
LB – you’re the best! By the way, I am impressed that you were willing to put yourself “out on the line” in order to express your thoughts. I do think it’s important for you to do so as you try to figure things out. (as long as it’s done respectfully, which it always is).
shkoyach!
FuturePotus – Shkoyach! That was very well-put!
Joseph,
Miniskirt is little harder. I think the analysis remains the same according to the Bais Yosef, and so in such a situation the community would have al mi lismichu. However, I personally think that Mishnah Berurah’s read of the Gemarah in Berachos works better, so I couldn’t say that I believe it is halachicaly okay.
Why is miniskirts harder than sleeveless?
And how’s the MB’s read better?
Lilmod, Rav Moshe’s teshuva is in Iggrot Moshe Even HaEzer vol. 1. 114. Rav Ovadia disagrees (Yabia Omer vol. 3, Even HaEzer 21). So it would turn on who is muchzak (has possession ofthe asset) as in such a case we leave it with him or her. The Supreme Rabbinical Court (file 835204/1 – available on-line) in fact ruled that the husband is muchzak in the ketuba so here she would lose it. What an American bet din would do is another question as it is a machloket (see’Shiur #12: “Muchzakut” With Regard to the Ketuba Payment” by Rav Yair Kahn Translated by David Silverberg available on-line) However, the rabbinical courts here have accepted the Community Property Law as halachically binding as minhag hamedina. Thus they are both muchzak in matrimonial property. An interesting situation would be if she grabs the value ofthe ketuba before leaving as she might then be considered the muchzeket (see
????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ???? – available on-line).
FuturePOTUS, to my understanding OO is not condoning acts but looking the other way. Is this different than looking the other way regarding people who commit financial crimes (also a toeva – Devarim 25:13).
It should be noted that Rav Ovadia does not say that he must divorce her. In fact, he says explicitly that the situation in our times could be reason to allow him to stay married to her.
FuturePOTUS, to my understanding OO is not condoning acts but looking the other way. Is this different than looking the other way regarding people who commit financial crimes
There is a difference between condoning certain relationship and looking the other way. Many mainstream more modern places do look the other way , but they will not openly endorse anything
Joseph,
Arms, from the Gemara in Kesubos, are clearly only a Daas Yehudis (i.e. minhag). Legs, on the other hand, are mentioned in the Gemara as erva. The Shulchan Aruch (following the Rambam) understands legs as just an example of something you might have thought was not a makom mechusa, but really is. To me this is a more dochek reading of the Gemara. I explained why at length in a previous thread but I can’t remember what it was called.
LUL – Volume 3, pages 168 & 169. It is very clear this is what Rav Moshe holds.
“FuturePOTUS, to my understanding OO is not condoning acts but looking the other way. “
Naivete is hardly a laudable trait
Here are some of several articles by Rabbi Gordimer worth a read
Will the Real Modern Orthodoxy Please Stand Up?
Open Orthodoxy and the Rebirth of the Conservative Movement
The Open Orthodox Race to the Edge and Beyond: When Will It Stop..
lightbrite,
There is a bigger greater destiny for the World with the Torah as the Compass and lodestone.We all must bend if our inclinations for the it (and yes all suffer if you wish to call it that)
By choosing to harp on one topic and individuals you’re avoiding
asking the bigger questions e.g.how come the Holocaust?How come there is suffering?Are we heading somewhere?Where are we heading?
I think making a halachic permission of nursing in shul goes beyond simply looking the other way. Same with recommending donations to rebuild a church and other ‘heterim.’ Also, by looking the other way, they are more or less condoning an action. ‘Celebrating’ toevah marriage isn’t far from endorsing it, but that is more difficult for them to permit because it is explicitly banned in the Torah.
I’m not sure if it’s halachically different than financial crimes, but I don’t see why it should be.
Lightbrite,
Anyone born with a predilection to murder,adultery, or ,say,shoplifting and will be unable to control themselves
Should we give them a free pass??
“The greste k’fira in heintige tzeitin, is k’fira in bechira !”
which applies to anyone who for whatever sad reason is an
and has little/zero attraction for the opposite gender
On the other hand if they “come out of the closet” We absolutely have to push them out, if Orthodoxy is to mean anything at all
Avi K and GAW – thank you for the sources. I will look at it when I have a chance, b”n.
So I just checked on HebrewBooks, and they don’t seem to have the third volume of Igros Moshe. I guess that explains why I couldn’t find these shu”tim when I tried to look last week.
And it’s too late to borrow from a neighbor now. So it will probably have to wait. Oh, well.
LB – you never cease to impress me! I am extremely impressed by your intellectual honesty, sincerity, and humility. kol hakavod!
Lightbrite,
Anyone born with a predilection to murder,adultery,incest, or ,say,shoplifting and will be unable to control themselves
Should we give them a free pass??
Where were you and OO when civilizations of the past accused us for being ‘narrow’,’rigid’ and “destroying peoples’ happiness” due to our refusal to bend for the prior mentioned?Should we have bent? What about all those poor individuals’ “suffering” [ read Shakespeare if/when examples are needed]?
“The greste k’fira in heintige tzeitin, is k’fira in bechira !”
which applies to anyone who for whatever sad reason is an
and has little/zero attraction for the opposite gender
On the other hand if they “come out” and flaunt it We absolutely have to push them out, if Orthodoxy means anything at all
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.