- This topic has 72 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
An ikur (sic) of emunah to respect talmidei chachomim? Which if the 13 ikkarim is that, exactly? You seem to have a tendency to do ikur on halacha, on minhag, and on rationality, but what does that have to do with emunah?
@ RGPANSN
“Chazal have used the criteria of “go and see what Yidden have been doing” to decide halacha.”
True that
The criteria has extended into Shulchan Aruch and Nosei Keilim to include even a minhag noshim (who might not be as learned as men)
Right, when their custom was upheld by the Rebbonim.
It is Chazal, the Rishonim, the Shulchan Aruch and Gedolai Haposkim we rely on who upheld the custom in question and it is on them we are relying.
You are trying to apply these principles to justify new beliefs and practices that all the Gedolei HaRabbonim who have weighed in on the matter opposed.
Furthermore you stated that reason / shikul hada’at is not relevant to making the determination when in fact it is very much the shikul hada’at of Gedolei HaRabbonim we rely on in determining what minchag to accept and what to be doche b’ shtei yedayim.
Cheers
@ TT
“eilu v’eilu is a holy Jewish value, except when one of the sides is Moshe Rabbeinu (ispashtusa d’Moshe bechdel dor). That’s the lesson we learn from Korach – he was a big talmid chucho vechu’, but when you argue on the Nossi you are nothing, you lose all maamad”“remember Rashi? Tol mateh vehach al kodkodom, dabor echod ledor etc!”
Ah, the old my Rebbe was Moshe Rabbeinu so all the Gedolim who opposed him where adat Korach argument. Unfortunately, this one is not just a TT special.
Reb G. Folding the talis under reduces the slipping off the shoulder.
Also you wrote “Rav Hutner had a talmid by the name of Freifeld.” His talmid was not Freifeld but Harav Shlomo Freifeld the Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshiva Shar Yoshuv in Far Rockaway.
lacisrmma – you are right, when I heard the story, I heard it from those who were his “buddies” that called him knowingly”Freifeld”, and I mistakenly repeated it that way, which I shouldn’t have, I apologize for that, because to us he is Harav Freifeld z”l.
lacisrmma “Folding the talis under reduces the slipping off the shoulder.”
My husband, a talmid of the Rosh Yeshiva, heard that Rav Hutner z”l adopted this minhag (of folding talis under shoulder) from the Lubavitcher Rebbe (who also folds that way talis on his shoulder) – whom the Rosh Yeshiva learned with b’chavrusa from when Rabbi Schnnerson arrived to America till he became Rebbe. It has to do with kabbalistic “hiding” the black stripes of talis (gevurah) and only exposing the white part of talis (chesed) on the shoulder of the mispallel by tucking them under.
As this shows, that even “mundane” hanhogas of gedolim have deeper reasons (of which few of us ever knew). It also shows the gadlus of the Rosh Yeshiva to be “open” to be mekabel hanhogos from others (even kabbalistic ones), his great respect for other gedolim (even those he sometimes criticized – he refused to permit his talmidim to attend farbrengens at Lubavitch).
TomomTihyeh,
“which ikkarei emunah am I denying in that post, exactly?”
2, 3, 5, and 7.
I do not now how the term “shiva call” became part of our vernacular. It really is performing the mitzvah of nichum aveilim.
“I do not now how the term “shiva call” became part of our vernacular. It really is performing the mitzvah of nichum aveilim.”
You don’t understand how a 2-word phrase became more popular than using an entire sentence every time?
Rav Hutner response upon being asked how Chabad is so successful in propaganda
“because they were last ones left in Russia together with the Bolsheviks”And This was over 40 years ago
Compare with The mirth he would have had from Dalfin’s Publications
lowerourtuition, according to you:
“bentching lulov” should be performing mitzva of netilas lulov…
“washing for bread” should be netilas yadayim for bread…
“putting on tefillin” should be keshiras tefillin…
“eating in sukkah” should be yeshiva b’sukkah…
there is loshon bnei adam and loshon ha’Torah.
the two are not always the same (as pointed out by chazal at various places).It is Time – “propaganda”? I think kupas ha-Ir and related tzedaks with badly photoshopped pictures are way ahead. ..dial here for a brocha…press 1 for parnasa, press 2 for shidduch, press 3 for health, press 4 for children, press 6 for…
keshiras tefillin
I would say “hanachas tefillin.” But what do I know?
The Wolf
I do not now how the term “shiva call” became part of our vernacular.
Do you also wonder why we park in a driveway and drive on a parkway?
The Wolf
Minhag oker Halacha has a restriction, there has to be a Maan Deamar that agrees with it. Even a single opinion. This is because normally we go after the majority opinion but when there is an established Minhag like a minority we can/should side that way. (however in monetary situations it is not like this, there you do not need an existing opinion. Thats just how Choshen Mishpat works)
Even if it were a true statement that minhag trumps halachah, that point would have no place concerning invented mesoras like Chabad. Otherwise, what would stop you from saying Reform Jews have a “minhag” to eat treif?
Re: Rav Hutner response about Chabad propaganda and Bolsheviks.
I’m skeptical of a majority of “told over” sayings of admorim.
The Satmar Rebbe , when a chosid told him over and questioned him about something he once said, reportedly said, ” Most of the things that people say I said, I never said.”
And I’m skeptical if he even said that.
” TOLD OVER,” sounds like the telephone game.
My wife often tells me over things I said to challenge me, which I’m pretty sure I never said, and I tell her over the same.
Yes, he told over, she told over.“The Satmar Rebbe , when a chosid told him over and questioned him about something he once said, reportedly said, ” Most of the things that people say I said, I never said.”
And I’m skeptical if he even said that.”So, if he didn’t say it, does that mean you don’t have to be skeptical? But, then you would assume he did say it. But, then you would assume he didn’t. This is like one of those riddles you tell an evil, self-aware computer so that it will short circuit and not take over the world.
Neville,
You’re right, I’m confused. Maybe a researcher on a grant could write a couple of volumes on what admorim said, how it was denied by “witnesses” , how it morphed from what was actually said , if said at all, to what the Tell Overs repeat.
It’s happening all the time with a He Said that is denied later, brought back to life by signed pakshevillin which in turn are
challenged to their veracity,and on and on. Your computer has already taken over the world.You described it accurately.Wolf – “keshiras tefillin…I would say “hanachas tefillin.” But what do I know?”
The posuk says ‘u’k’shartem’ (you shall bind them) , not “v’hinachtem’ (you shall place them) – indeed, we routinely call it “putting on tefilin” = “hanachas tefilin”, rather than the way the Torah calls it: “keshiras tefilin”..
The posuk says ‘u’k’shartem’ (you shall bind them) , not “v’hinachtem’ (you shall place them) – indeed, we routinely call it “putting on tefilin” = “hanachas tefilin”, rather than the way the Torah calls it: “keshiras tefilin”..
Well then, I guess I must be a complete idiot and am ha’aretz, since I have never made the bracha of “asher kidishanu b’mitvosav, vitzivanu, l’kasher tefillin.”
Thank you for educating me.
The Wolf
“Do you also wonder why we park in a driveway and drive on a parkway?”
Speaking only for myself, I can say that I drive in my driveway and, when traffic is at a standstill, often park on a parkway.
Wolf, No, c”v to think of yourself as “complete” idiot (your words). The underlying question of why indeed do we make a brocha of “l’haneach tefilin” and not “likshor tefilin” – as loshon ha possuk, is well discussed, though many might not know of the discussion.
I will cite a bit on the topic:
שו”ת מהרי”ט
לפיכך אין מברכין וצונו “לקשור” תפילין כמו שכתוב בתורה וקשרתם לאות על ידך, משום דאין כונת התורה באומרה וקשרתם על ההנחה, אלא על הקשר שצריך להיות ברצועת התפילין, וכונת הכתוב שיעשה קשר ברצועת התפילין כדי שע”י זה יהיה אח”כ לאות על ידך, דומיא דקרא דוכתבתם על מזוזות ביתך שאין כותבים אותו על הבית אלא על הקלף, כדי שאח”כ יוכל לקובעה על המזוזה של הבית, ומזה הטעם שאין מברכין על הקשירה שהיא רק הכשר בעשיית התפילין, אלא מברכין להניח שהוא עיקר המצוה, עכ”ד.
That the k’shira is not the mitzva, the intent of “u;keshartem” is thatt the tefilin should have a kesher when placing it on hand. Just as mezuzah the possuk says “v’kesavtem” but the mitzva is not to write the mezuzah on the doorpost (the writing is on the parchment), but to place it there.שו”ת הר צבי או”ח א סימן כג ד”ה ומעתה ניהדר :
אלא דיש לעיין, אם הקשירה היא מגוף המצוה או שעצם המצוה היא רק מה שמונח על היד והקשירה אינה אלא הכשר למצות ההנחה, וכן נראה מלשון הברכה: אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להניח תפילין ואינו מברך לקשור תפילין ויש קצת ראיה לזה – “ר”ש בן אלעזר אומר מעשה באשה אחת שנישאת לחבר והיתה קושרת לו תפילין על ידו”…, אלא על כרחך, זה שאשה קושרת, הוא משום דאין הקשירה וההידוק חלק מן המצוה אלא ההנחה שלאחר ההידוק בלבד, היינו, שמצות הנחת תפילין היא, שיהיו התפילין קשורים על ידו וראשו.
after asking if keshira is part of mitzvas tefilin, concludes that it isn’t, some proof derived from fact that woman made kesher…שו”ת מנחת שלמה תנינא (ב – ג) סימן ב ד”ה בתחלה הנני
בתחלה הנני להעיר, שגם דעתי העניה מסכמת לדבריך, דאם קשר תפילין כשהוא קטן ובעודן עליו נתגדל דאינו צריך לחלצן ולחזור אח”כ ולהניחן … נמצא דעצם פעולת הקשירה לא מעלה ולא מוריד, ועיקר כונת הכתוב בוקשרתם הוא רק שיהיו התפילין מונחים , ואף אם הונחו מאליהן אם מתכוין עכשיו למצוה שפיר מקיים מצות תפילין.
the mitzva is that the tefilin should be on the hand, not the tying or even the placing, if they were placed on their own, if he intends for the mitzva, the mitzva is fulfilled.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.