When young adult leaves to be Frei

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee When young adult leaves to be Frei

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 114 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #776699
    SJSinNYC
    Member

    DH,

    I respect your opinion, but my experience with some who went OTD or are Orthoprax leads me to beleive otherwise. There are some unanswerable questions, some things that look like paradoxes and some things that seem historically inaccurate. It does take emunah.

    Health,

    I’m sorry you don’t see the connection between OTD and Orthoprax. Most Orthoprax people that I know don’t go OTD because they are married and have children and they don’t think sacrificing their family is worth it, even if they don’t believe. They are OTD but they just don’t look it.

    In addition, there is a myth that in order to go OTD you have to be screwed up in some way (see earlier posts on this thread). There is a growing trend for people to go OTD/Orthoprax because of belief, not because of any major issues in their life.

    mw13, Judaism doesn’t claim to have all the answers in current form. They are all hidden within Torah. But to say that we know all the answers from Judaism is wrong.

    #776701

    Although I don’t understand how a person can remain frum believing as you do, I nevertheless respect your opinion and your commitment to Judaism despite what you perceive as proof to the contrary.

    Your statements though seem to suggest that it your beliefs regarding seeming unanswerable discrepancies are fact rather than your opinion. With that I must strongly disagree.

    #776702
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    MW13: What do you suggest to someone who has looked through the proofs and decides they are not good enough for him/her? Should he not believe?

    DHM & Wolf: Interesting argument (I believe going back to the Rishonim, though I don’t have sources) if Hashem is restrained by logic. For the question Wolf poses, the Shiita of the Rambam works nicely, I think.

    #776703

    JRafael:

    The Bais Halevi at the end of Bo says that it is impossible to prove Yiddishkeit to a person who has lost his emuna.

    He explains there that all the debates that took place with chaza”l were to disprove anything that disproves Judaism. But to positively prove Judaism is impossible.

    I understand this to mean that there is nothing that disproves Judaism but there is also no empirical evidence to prove it.

    #776705
    mw13
    Participant

    SJSinNYC:

    “There are some unanswerable questions, some things that look like paradoxes and some things that seem historically inaccurate. It does take emunah.”

    There may be things we don’t know the answer to, but we still must be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Judaism is correct. For example, we may not understand how free will and Divine Providence can co-exist, but we can prove they do.

    “mw13, Judaism doesn’t claim to have all the answers in current form. They are all hidden within Torah. But to say that we know all the answers from Judaism is wrong.”

    To say we know all the answers to everything is indeed a mistake;

    but to say that we can intellectually prove our religion is the correct one is from the basics of Judaism.

    GAW:

    “MW13: What do you suggest to someone who has looked through the proofs and decides they are not good enough for him/her? Should he not believe?”

    No, I would suggest he go speak to a Rov, a kiruv professional, or somebody of the like. We have the answers, so we should not fear the questions.

    #776706
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    For the question Wolf poses, the Shiita of the Rambam works nicely, I think.

    Which is…?

    The Wolf

    #776707
    mw13
    Participant

    If I’m not mistaken, the Rambam says something to the effect that it is not humanly possible to understand how free will and Divine Providence can co-exist.

    #776708
    anon1m0us
    Participant

    That being said: g-d is outside the realm if time, that is why it says in Sefer Shemos, he is past, present & future. So Hashem is looking in from the outside to all the possibilities that you can ever make and knows the outcome of it. We are in a time-space dimension so it is hard for us to understand an existence not bound by time.

    For us, we have the free-will to decide anything we want. As Feynman stated, there are multiple possibilities that can occur within time-space. However, the fact that Hashem is not bound by the dimension, he knows the outcomes of the past, present and future. SO if you do change your mind and the last second, your future also changes, and to hashem it is knows since time does not exist. All dimensions are one. I guess it comes down to Hamyvin Yovin.

    #776709
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    If I’m not mistaken, the Rambam says something to the effect that it is not humanly possible to understand how free will and Divine Providence can co-exist.

    I thought he just says not to ask it, not that the solution is unobtainium.

    Wolf, you of all people should know that cause and effect do not necessarily follow each other, so you shouldn’t even have the question.

    MW13: That just pushes off the question. And after that doesn’t work….

    #776710

    i believe the Rambam was addressing the question about the supposed conflict between free will and Daas Hashem (the fact that Hashem knows what will happen)

    i dont know his exact approach but it was explained to me something like this:

    Q: it is not possible for me to reconcile free will with Daas Hashem. this is an unresolvable paradox and it really bothers me.

    A: does the conflict between free will and Salvanism bother you as well? Do you find a paradox there?

    Q: of course not, i have no idea what Salvanism is!

    A: and you think you understand the Mind of Hashem, His Daas?

    #776711
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Mr 80:

    Sounds good to me, if one is willing to accept it as that. It refers to the side of “Hashem doesn’t have to follow logic”.

    #776712

    of course by “logic” (which sounds like some kind of unchanging ultimate Truth) what you really mean is human logic, formulated by puny, human minds and culture.

    yes, Hashem is not bound by our understanding of the universe.

    #776713
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    of course by “logic” (which sounds like some kind of unchanging ultimate Truth) what you really mean is human logic, formulated by puny, human minds and culture.

    yes, Hashem is not bound by our understanding of the universe.

    Agreed. But you will not win any arguments that way with a sceptic.

    #776714
    SJSinNYC
    Member

    DH, its easy for me to believe because I believe in the premise of G-d. I also believe that not every meforash is 100% correct and there is information we don’t understand. And I have emunah.

    mw13, there are plenty of questions which don’t have excellent answers or answers that truly go beyond a reasonable doubt.

    #776715
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    Regarding the Ramabam it’s in Hilchos Teshuva Perek Hey Halacha Hey.

    The Ravad there happens to take a strong stand against what the Rambam seemingly writes.

    Rav Shach in Avi Ezri has a fascinating explanation of that Rambam and continues with a very fundemental explanation of Emunah.

    Rav Shach writes clearly that Belief in G-d is a logical conclusion and not what emunah refers to.

    #776716

    i wasnt trying to win any argument with anyone

    i was trying to explain the Rambam , as i understood him, to someone here who mentioned it.

    but, in any case, some will find meaning in it, and some wont. it all depends on what one is looking for.

    #776717
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Regarding the Ramabam it’s in Hilchos Teshuva Perek Hey Halacha Hey.

    Also Yesodei Hatorah towards the end of the second perek.

    #776718
    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    No, no dysfunctional family, there were things of major importance that didnt go right in the young adult’s life, despite parents’ huge efforts.

    Young adult chooses to have nothing to do with parents, but might, down the line, have some contact with siblings.

    Why do I doubt this story?

    People who have a good relationship with their parents don’t cut off contact from them.

    I assume they are not good parents, and probably don’t have a good relationship with each other either.

    Despite their outward appearances.

    #776719
    aries2756
    Participant

    binahyeseira & MW, the disconnection comes from NOT being taught the LOVE of Yiddishkeit rather being taught the Lav of Yiddishkeit. Everyone is so so busy teaching kids what they are doing wrong instead of teaching them or respecting them for what they are doing right! The best way to TEACH LOVE is with encouragement and positive energy not criticisms and negativity. There is no room for negativity when dealing with children. If you want children to love Hashem, love Yiddishkeit and Love learning you have to make it a loving experience, make it palatable and make it as sweet as heaven itself. The home has to be a symbol of the BEAUTY of yiddishkeit and NOT of how hard it is to be a Jew. The Yeshiva has to be a place where Yiddin are b’simcha and yiddishkeit is taught b’simcha. It has to be taught with love. Every mechanech has to be warm and caring. They have to be invested in the success of their students. It can’t just be a JOB for them. And if they goof and make a mistake THEY have to show that they are human and be accountable and responsible. IF they have to apologize do so. They can’t ignore an error just to teach you have to have respect for the mechanech. THAT backfires. Admitting you were wrong, apologizing and showing respect for the TALMID shows the talmidim that they must doubly respect the mechanech because they are being taught the true Torah Mode. They are taught that EVEN a Rebbe or a Rosh is only Human and NOT on the madreigah of Hashem and can make a mistake, correct it, and keep going. That is a very important lesson for children. Children are made to feel that if they make a mistake their life is over.

    #776720

    just be careful you dont become rigidly fixed in any particular direction.

    there is also a place for criticism, for Tochacha, for guidance in improving, for discipline.

    #776721
    aries2756
    Participant

    Mod 80, yes but tochacha and discipline must be done with love and not anger. When done properly it is accepted properly. When done coldly, impatiently and with anger it is rejected.

    #776722

    of course

    #776723
    zahavasdad
    Participant

    Language means alot

    What is the opposite of FREI?

    It in itself is a powerful word and says alot

    #776724
    aries2756
    Participant

    You are correct I would say the opposite is “bound” or “burdened”.

    #776725

    SJSinNYC:

    I don’t really understand where your hashkafa is coming from. It is certainly not what I have been taught and some of it doesn’t make any sense to me. So I will have to leave it at that.

    #776726
    SJSinNYC
    Member

    DH,

    Its how I’ve been taught. It may be hard for me to be explicit on YWN about it, but basically, I don’t believe in the infallibility of chazal. I don’t believe that they never made any mistakes.

    For example, I don’t believe the sun goes “behind” the rakiah at night. But that’s irrelevant to following halacha.

    Not that it changes halacha. I also believe in the halachic process – I think you need a living process in order to make a viable way to follow Torah Judaism. Contemporary rabbonim pasken based on historical context and extrapolate to the contempary needs of the people. There is a reason Torah lo bashamayim he is so important.

    I have never been taught that everything chazal and the great leaders of the past said is 100% true. Even in my RW elementary school.

    #776727

    Orthoprax is a big problem and I’m not sure how to fight it within our community….I have a feeling that many practice, look and act Frum, but don’t really believe or put their heart in it…

    #776728
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    SJS:

    I don’t think anyone, including the most RW and Chazal themselves, would claim they are “infallible”. It would be Apikorsus on their part. We have gone though this here (in the CR) before as well.

    From what you are saying, you agree we can treat as “halachicly true” (love that term) what Chazal said, even if it has emperically proven to be false. For example the famous “lice” case, where we “know” the opposite of what Chazal said (lice grow from nothing): We either re-interpet Chazal to conform with known facts, or are Machmir as such (since it is well known Chazal did speak in allegory) while considering the other side as well.

    (regarding Emunah) There is nothing wrong with having questions without answers. The choice is to believe that there are ultimate answers to the questions, even if our minds can not begin to fathom them (as Mr. 80 pointed out). I believe that is what SJS is saying. If DHM has all of the answers, he is not only ahead of me, but Shlomo Hamelech, Moshe Rabbanu, and others (which is why I’m sure that is not what he means either).

    #776729
    Grandmaster
    Member

    From what you are saying, you agree we can treat as “halachicly true” (love that term) what Chazal said, even if it has emperically proven to be false. For example the famous “lice” case, where we “know” the opposite of what Chazal said (lice grow from nothing): We either re-interpet Chazal to conform with known facts, or are Machmir as such (since it is well known Chazal did speak in allegory) while considering the other side as well.

    Rav Breil, the Rebbi of the Pachad Yiztchok, teaches us that we do not even entertain the possibility of a statement in Chazal not coming from the Torah. This we see from Rav Briel’s answer to the Pachad Yiztchok’s question regarding the killing of lice on Shabbos. The Gemora permits it, based on a scientific fact. The Pachad Yiztchok asked his Rebbi that due to the possibility that this scientific fact is incorrect, perhaps we should be machmir and not kill lice on Shabbos, just in case.

    #776730
    Feif Un
    Participant

    GAW: I agree with your statement about questions and answers. The problem is when in schools they discourage questions, and humiliate you for asking certain ones. I had a tremendous amount of respect for a Rebbe who knew when to say, “I don’t know, but I’ll try to find out.”

    Unfortunately, I also had Rabbeim who didn’t say that, and either just discouraged questions, or told you to just accept things without any explanation.

    #776731
    SJSinNYC
    Member

    Yes GAW. That sums it up well.

    But apparently you are wrong about people believing in the infallibility of chazal.

    #776732
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Grandmaster:

    I have no problem with that. All he is saying is that Halachic reality trumps actual reality. Just like Migu doesn’t necessarily require that the person would actually lie, Halacha decides that he has Nemanus (Or Koach HaTaiyna). Or if you don’t understand like the Chasam Sofer (pashtus), that “Besulim” is defined by Chazal, not the actual presence of the physical Besulim. This is the opinion of Rav Belsky as well. Others hold one should be Machmir for both sides.

    Interesting that the other person to bring in this “Rabbi Breil” was The Joseph, no?

    #776733
    twisted
    Participant

    Perhaps this is the fulfillment of the Tochacho’s terrifying curse: “the land of your enemies will consume you”? Galus, and the galus hasShechina cloud our vision. Things that are ‘consumed’ in nature are often gifted certain defenses. A trauma (emotional) free education is not enough. There needs to be a well conceived education in Yesodei Hadas, and the tools to ask and answer questions, along with all the love and beauty stuff mentioned above. Defense mechanisms.

    #776734

    Allow me to quote the Ben Ish Chai on that gemarah in Pesachim that was quoted earlier. After giving his explanation of the gemarah there on 94b, he adds:

    ???? ????’ ???? ??? ???? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ??????? ???…??? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ??? ???????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ????? ??? ???? ?? ??????

    If you would say the nature of the world changed, I could understand that. I think I saw in the Yalkut MeAm Loez that there were a number of times that the teva changed. But especially with regards to the sun where it is clear that chaza”l knew the earth was round, I mean there’s a Mishnah, Zohar, Talmud Bavli, Yerushalmi and Midrash all saying that the world is round, it’s hard for me to hear that they ‘didn’t know’. The gemarah is Torah she’ba’al peh- how can it be wrong?

    I do not think that I have all the answers. But I do think that all the answers are out there and available to those who search. hofach bah v’hofach bah. The chisaron is in my yidiyah not in chaza”l’s Torah.

    You are making this into a philosophical question g_a_w: do I have all of life’s answers? We are talking on a practical level. No, I can’t explain the deepest kabbalistic secrets and while Shlomo HaMelech could, maybe he couldn’t explain even deeper secrets than that. But I am sure he could explain everything else based on the Torah.

    #776735
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    The Rambam says that through limud haTorah and through contemplation of the briah a person will come to have emunah.

    While that may be the case once one accepts the premise that God does exist and that he gave us the Torah, the Rambam is explicit that this is not the case for someone who is searching by way of pure logic. He writes [and I paraphrase]:

    The speech is fairly logical and straightforward. In order to disprove it, you would have to introduce some pretty shaky hypotheses including the DH.

    I do not wish to debate the technicalities of the DH and I doubt the mods would allow it anyway, but suffice it to say that it is only because you have a prior belief of Torah miSinai that you reject the hypothesis. As SJS correctly pointed out there are logical ways around, and even problems, with that argument. As a matter of fact I recently emailed four problems I had with it to a prominent Rabbi in this field and I am currently awaiting his response. The point is that from a purely academic standpoint it would seem that the DH is very viable. It is only because of emunah that you reject it out of hand.

    The creation of a paradox should still be within means of an omnipotent being, do you not agree?

    According to the Rambam, this is a serious mistake. Again, I quote [paraphrasing]:

    Let me just say that I agree to what SJS and Charliehall have been saying; I am just adding my piece.

    #776736
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Grandmaster-

    Rav Breil, the Rebbi of the Pachad Yiztchok, teaches us that we do not even entertain the possibility of a statement in Chazal not coming from the Torah.

    Allow me to paraphrase a Gemara in Chullin:

    [paraphrasing again]:

    #776737

    yitayning:

    I don’t have a Moreh Nevuchim at home and it is very late. But according to the rest of your wuote in its original context at sacred-texts, it seems to me that he is saying that the amount of time it would take a person to go through all the various branches of Logic, Math, Phsyics and Metaphysics would not leave a person time to finish finding the truth, that there is a G-d. Not that it couldn’t be done just that it would take too long. But had there been time we would be able to “make assertions about Him”.

    Just because I automatically reject the DH doesn’t mean I’m factually wrong. But to paraphrase a certain goy “You have to assume that the sources worked towards consistency while the R did the exact opposite”.

    The gemarah in Chulin is also not a good proof, The line that I …’ed out above from the Ben Ish Chai was

    ????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ???? ??????

    It’s widely known that Chaza”l hid sod in pshat. It is very easy to say that what they were talking about was not only what we see but also what we don’t see, but they saw.

    #776738

    I don’t think that the Rambam was talking about this type of paradox. Also it is widely known that the Rambam didn’t learn kabballah until after he wrote his sefarim (cf. Shomrei Emunim haKadmon, see below) and so he may not have been aware of the “tzimtzum” until then. I don’t claim to understand it myself, but I think it is logical to say that a contraction to Infinite is itself a paradox.

    But even without that we can already see that we are a paradox to Hashem to begin with. How do you explain ‘??? ??? ???? ???? without minimizing Hashem? How can there be an existence let alone a finite one in tandem with the Infinite without taking away from its infinity?

    This is a quote from the Shomrei Emunim HaKadmon. He was a Rishon. In ????? ?”? there he quotes the Abarbanel’s ???? ???? ?”? (among others):

    ??? ??? ????? ????”? ???????? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??????. “???? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ?????? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ???”. ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??”?

    #776739
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Derech Hamelech-

    Not that it couldn’t be done just that it would take too long.

    I must disagree with you. The Rambam goes so far as to say that Aristotle got it right for someone who didn’t have the tradition we do. He explains with a mashal of a man who grows up alone on an island – he would devise fantastic scientific theories to explain his existence, simply because no one ever told him that he was born from a man and a woman or that a woman even exists. In theory he would be approaching the problem of his existence in the correct manner, he is simply missing information that is impossible for him to obtain. (See ibid 2:17)

    As for the DH, I do not wish to debate it’s merits and demerits. I only wanted to say that the proof you brought (the article on simpletoremember) is not perfect, and in my opinion it still boils down to emunah.

    Regarding the Gemara in Chullin, while in aggadic passages I am perfectly willing to say that they weren’t talking literally, I am sorry but I find it difficult that the Gemara is hiding sod in an obviously halachic Gemara. Once you go down that road where do you end, if you say that every place where their facts seem to be grounded in observation they were really talking about something else, then perhaps the halachos were never meant to be taken literally, and we should cross out half of Yoreh De’ah. Besides, I quoted a Rambam who says in no uncertain terms that Chazal didn’t always get it right in matters of Science and Mathematics.

    #776740
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    According to the Rambam we can fathom nothing at all about Hashem. I do not believe he ever studied kabbala, and if you study enough Rambam I doubt you’ll believe it either. Look in the Iggeros Harambam, they bring those supposed ‘letters’ and there is almost no doubt that they are forgeries.

    #776741
    Grandmaster
    Member

    The GRA declared in his commentary on Laws of Avodah Zarah that even the Rambam has had certain of his Torah positions corrupted due to the influence of his secular studies in philosophy.

    #776742
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Well guess what – I’m sure the Rambam himself disagreed!

    #776743

    But that Mashal is not a good one here at all. Any individual is not growing up in a vacuum, where the concept of G-d is alien and he needs to come to this brand new thought. The idea is already here and it is up to people to use whatever tools are at his disposal to conclude whether it is emes or not.

    I acutally didn’t know that simpletoremember had an article on the DH altogether although after you mentioned it I found a couple. The professor that I was talking about is not mentioned there though. His book is considered a standard text on the critique of this. But let’s leave off it.

    I am not saying that the gemarah is not also halachic, but there is definitely sod in every sugyah. And it is clear that this is what the Ben Ish Chai was saying. But really, think about it. They knew how to use the building blocks of the world that Hashem used to create the world itself -to create life (sanhedrin 67b) and you think they didn’t know that how the life they were creating worked?

    Not being able to fathom anything about Hashem is not a stirah to anything I’ve said. About the atzmiyus of Hashem there is nothing we can say. It is only about what He created that we can talk about.

    I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that from the Rambam’s works it is clear that he didn’t learn kabbalah since that is exaclty what I quoted to you earlier: That the Rambam said after he had already learned kabbalah that if he wouldn’t be so old already and his works would not have already gone out into the world he would have been chozer on many things he wrote.

    I don’t know why you call the letter a forgery. The Shomrei Emunim HaKadmon didn’t think it was. The Abarbanel that he quoted didn’t. The Ramban and Mohara”m Alshker are also quoted. I don’t understand why you think it was a forgery.

    #776744
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    The gemarah in Chulin is also not a good proof, The line that I …’ed out above from the Ben Ish Chai was

    ????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ???? ??????

    It’s widely known that Chaza”l hid sod in pshat. It is very easy to say that what they were talking about was not only what we see but also what we don’t see, but they saw.

    Exactly. And since as far as we know they did not mean actual fact but rather Halachic fact (for whatever reason), we have no right to dismiss their words as false, C”V.

    As far as “having all the answers”, I guess you just haven’t asked all the questions yet 🙂 (which is better, if you don’t have them).

    #776745
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    I just realized that I think my ‘proof’ from the Gemara in Chullin may have been misunderstood.

    I was not attempting to prove from R’ Mesharshia’s maskana that Chazal’s knowledge of scientific matters was based on observation. It was from the way he got there. He was trying to figure out a purely halachic sheila: If an animal has an unkosher foot, and then it gives birth, does the non-kosher status of the mother’s foot transfer to the child and in what way? He therefore said, let us figure out what happens when a child is conceived. Does a child’s foot come from the parent’s foot, and therefore the child’s foot will be unkosher too, or does the seed get mixed up, and the foot is coming from other body parts of the parent as well. Later on he retracted his question, because he said that if it were true that a foot bears a foot then every cripple would only bear cripples, and we see this isn’t true. If his science did not come from observation then what in the world was his hava amina and how did he retract it in his maskana?

    The answers you are giving are not mistavra and take the gemara out of context. Besides, I have a mefurashe Rambam on my side.

    I have a question: Why do you, or some acharonim and maybe even rishonim for that matter, assume in the first place that Chazal’s knowledge was from anything but observation? Where in the gemara is any tanna or amora quoted as saying that his knowledge of the physical world was perfect? For me the most compelling reason to accept what the Rambam says is that why must I bend over backwards to say mind bending and seemingly out of context pshatim in so many gemaras when the most pashute explanation is to simply that their scientific knowledge was based on observation?

    #776747

    Let’s say Reuven knew all the computer programming languages: basic, c++, XML, whatever they all are- this guy knows them.

    Now you show him a certain computer game and Reuven explains to you how the programming works.

    Is it more mestaber that Reuven deconstructed the program and came up with some rules that seem to fit into the Logic of the programming?

    Or is it more likely that since Reuven knows the programming he probably called on his profound computer knowledge to explain how the programs works and if you too would be a computer programmer the Loops, Ifs, Else, etc.’s that Reuven is describing would make more sense to you too?

    There are a number of times that Chaza”l demonstrate their ability to create. On the Gemarah in Sanhedrin 67b “Rav Chaninah and Rav Oshiya, every erev Shabbos they toiled in hilchos Yetzira and created a three year old calf…” Rashi there says “…through combining the letters of Hashem that the world was created with…”

    In other Rashi is explaining that they knew the programming language.

    But the mishnah in Chagigah 11b says not to be doresh maaseh bereishis and maaseh merkavah in front of two and one people respectively ie. they have to hide the sod. So when they wanted to teach a certain inyan in nistar let’s say they hid it in the common yediya of their times that the earth was flat and the sun hid above the rakiya. And I don’t think that this is sheker because it must be that on some ruchniyusdig madreigah something like this occurs.

    But when it was noygeah l’mayseh for instance by avodah zara (41a) they clearly spelled out that the earth was round and therefore a depiction of a person holding a globe is avodah zara. Although I am confident that there too is also deeper inyanim.

    #776748
    chalilavchas
    Member

    Update to “Young adult chooses to have nothing to do with parents, but might, down the line, have some contact with siblings”:

    Young adult lives at home but says theyre no longer frum, they dont believe, theyre culturally religious and does their own thing outside of the house. This young adult used to be the frummest in the family and class (role model type).

    What is the most effective approach here? Has anyone had a similar situation?

    How do you love a child who you feel is stabbing you and the ideals you and past generations held dear in the heart?

    #776749
    Health
    Participant

    chalilavchas -I have similar with most of my kids. Love is unconditional, put your own Neigious away. You love him/her, not his/her actions. Let them know you love him/her and work on yourself to mean it. If at all possible, try to get them to see either a frum therapist (they work on Hashkafah too) or someone who works on being Mekarev people. Hatzlacha!

    #776750
    coke
    Member

    health- I am sorry to read your post above. Its not so easy to show your love to the child and not love their actions.

    #776751
    chalilavchas
    Member

    Health, thanks and Hatzlacha to you as well!

    If I as much as mention a frum therapist or a Kiruv person, my relationship is over. This is a very independent thinker. Not going to listen to anyone.

    Another very painful thing about this is being judged and nitpicked by frum people, who analyze how the parents are to blame (until it happens to them).

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 114 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.