Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
interesting, and even as Eliahu was chief rabbi (sic!) of Chelm, this does not sound like a joke!
He lived a short life born after and died before Maharal, there is 1630 book assigning Golem and “old synagogue” stories to him. Chacham Tzvi, Yaakov Emden are his descendants.
I don’t see references to him being in Prague, but I also don’t see references that he was not (sorry for using Chelm style!)
For further confusion, there was another Eliyahu Bal Shem _Loanz_ who was born at a similar time and actually was Maharal’s student. So, maybe this is how golem was transferred – through confused references to two Bal Shems?
TLIK, this seems like a good approach and it would work with an observant therapist, but not like the doctor heterim, as ujm points out. I wonder whether the phone connection can indeed solve the problem. Just put the spouse/mother/friend on an app. Possibly just video, reduced resolution. If connection goes down, they should call the office to do a check.
One problem with the above is the experience of security monitoring. There is almost never a case when a security person discovers low-level crime in real time. It is after a computer is stolen, you can wind the tape and find the perp. But even a lapsed security monitoring should make the doctor aware of consequences. The key is that the monitor should be independent of the doctor.
ujm, sorry, I skipped that you are discussing therapists specifically. It is not just the nature of the session, but also developing a close relationship.
from the same book:
a woman who visits a therapist may not rely on the heter of Baaloh B’ir, since she develops a close relationship with the therapist and he is considered a Libo Gas Boh (Nitei Gavriel 36:3).mdd1, I am not “speaking about Ravina”, I am asking a question specifically because of the his stature. I hope you have a good explanation.
I have a related question about “hasid ehad” who used to speak with Eliahu. Then he blocked the entrance (and poor could not come in) and Eliahu stopped coming. Presumably, the hasid noticed that Eliahu stopped coming. Surely, he then did teshuva and opened the entrance – based on the principle that T’Ch sinning in the evening does teshuva before morning. Then, Eliahu is so strict that he would not come even with teshuva. Alternatively [less likely, but suggested by Gemora not mentioning teshuva] the hasid prefers comfortable living to Eliahu’s visits? Then, what kind of hasid he was to begin with? Did he change in one day?
> Rebbe Meir is enough of a source, being a tanna
haver wife’s honor same as havero, so maybe she is also a tanna :)?> As the drishah famously writes, exceptional women can learn gemara,
Drisha indeed had a proof – his own mother (order of candlelighting on yom tov)> she didn’t put herself into a nisayon
I mean that she put herself into the nisayon by her learning. I think “daatan kalos” is a mida of being able to do/consider multiple things at the same time, not only/necessarily a put-down. As mentioned, she was learning from multiple teachers.> rebbe Meir may have initiated it, but it was min hashomayim
min hasomayim is never an excuse for someone’s actions, of course.Gadol > superscript R2, R3, or R4
I think you are going against the author’s intent 🙂
Mathematically, if R is infinite, then R^n is the same. There are of course, different infinities, appropriately called aleph_0,aleph_1 by R(eb) Cantor.amom > So everyone sticks to their beliefs.
this is indeed a sad case and information is very confusing, although a lot of things that can be supported by data and there are a lot of opinions that are clearly based on wrong information. As a bright spot in this sea of darkness, early in the pandemic, my kids talked to a friend who declared (parroting a parent) that covid takes less lives than auto-accidents. They jointly went through the math, and next week the friend wears a mask …
There is a story about, I think, R Salanter who got into a dispute with a maskil in an inn. R Salanter suggested that the loser of the debate would change to the opponent’s style of suit, and he took his jacket off to start. Maskil refused this condition and R Salanter refused debating saying there is no point debaing someone who is not ready to consider a possible defeat. This describes a lot of anti-intellectual discussions lately.
ujm, did not know about railroads!
We learned something though – Blackberry tried everything unique, failed. Apple survived. Everyone else uses standards.excellent news re: Britain, maybe they can soon join the union?!
or a husband?
how about a phone app that will have a remote female observe the visit?
quoting, for example, (Lubavich) R Dubov Laws of Yichud ch. 10, see for more there
In general, a man should try to visit a male doctor, and a woman, a female doctor. However, if no doctor of the same gender is available, it is permitted to be treated by a doctor of the opposite gender.meeting takes place in a public office or clinic during office hours
door to the doctor’s office is open slightly or closed but not locked, and other members of staff may enter at any time.
Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 6:40:12 writes that a woman may enter a doctor’s office for an examination if the door is closed but not locked (as long as there are three people in the waiting room, or else a man and his wife), for then it is considered a Pesach Posuach Lirshus Horabim. However, Nishmas Avraham 22:1 quotes Rabbi S. Z. Auerbach zt’l: “Rav Auerbach zt’l also told me that as long as a nurse, patient or any other person can at any time enter the examination room, whether as part of his or her job or whether in error, there is no transgression of Yichud.” The implication is that this Yichud situation is permissible even if there is nobody in the waiting room at the time, since the appointment is within office hours and someone may enter at any moment, hence creating a Pesach Posuach. This is also evident from the following Responsa from Igros Moshe Even HoEzer Vol. 4:65:1 who writes: “As regards a woman who needs to be examined by a doctor while undressed (even though there is another person in another room of the doctor’s offices, and it is not customary for anyone to enter his examination room, nevertheless,) it is a daily occurrence that even the wives of Torah scholars go alone to the doctor and are secluded with him in his office. This lenient behavior has become widespread because the doctor, be he a Jew or a non-Jew, is intent on his work, removing from him any lustful feelings. Even when he finishes his examination he cannot spend extra time with her, for there are other patients whom he has scheduled for the following time slot. And even if the next patient has not yet arrived, he fears that he or she may arrive soon. If she is the last patient for the day and he knows that no other patients are expected, one may rely on the presence of an employee in his office, for should he spend more than the usual amount of time with the patient, this will arouse suspicion. The doctor, Jew or non-Jew, will be careful that no suspicion is cast on his name that might harm his practice. However, she cannot be permitted to be secluded with him when there is no one else in the office and when no other patient is expected, and her son, daughter or husband must accompany her to such an appointment. But, if she did go to the appointment alone at such a time and transgressed the prohibition of Yichud, she is not forbidden to her husband, for Yichud alone is not sufficient to forbid a woman to her husband.” See also Minchas Ish 18:4.
Shevet Halevi (Shiurei Shevet Halevi Hilchos Niddah p. 278, Responsa Vol. 4:167) summarizes the guidelines of visitation by women to medical personnel:She should minimize as much as possible examination by male personnel.
Wherever possible, she should request a female doctor/nurse.
When a female doctor is not available or the male doctor is better qualified, it is permitted for her to be examined by a male.
Under no circumstances may a woman be examined by any medical personnel who are known to be promiscuous.
She should only visit a doctor during office hours when others are present in the office.
Whenever possible, she should be accompanied by another woman.
The doctor should leave the door of the office slightly ajar, or at least closed but not locked.
Non-observant medical personnel may advise a woman to do something in violation of halachah. Therefore, women should always take medical advice in conjunction with a competent Rav.
She should not engage in prolonged conversation or joke with the doctor, but rather just focus on the medical issue at hand.
As regards her husband accompanying her to the office, Shevet Halevi writes that if the husband will have to wait in a waiting room full of women (who may be prutzos), then this accompaniment for the purpose of mitigating the Yichud situation may be detrimental in terms of tznius. (However, it seems to this author that if the visit is to a private clinic in the doctor’s home or private offices it is preferable for her husband to attend.)ujm, could you be more specific with your reference?
R Yehuda mentions her, unprompted, as an example to someone who is less capable mentioning her learning from multiple teachers. Presumably, none of those teachers refused to teach her.Gadol > there still seems to be a competition as to how many honorific prefixes
You are not an only gadol who feels this way! R Kamentsky’s son writes in the introduction to his book that he is just using the letter R in front of each name leaving it up to the reader to read it as Reb, Rav, Rabbi, Rabban, Gadol Hador … (paraphrasing)
Not sure what is the chidush you guys are discussing. Yichud between a doctor and a patient is not a new thing and solutions exist. Maybe we need kashrus organizations to expand here and certify the doctor offices.
Avira, you are right about that. I am also curious how the end of her story jabs with her acceptance as a scholar. Maybe it means that social condition in general creates a condition and one should be careful. So, yes, Beruriah was able to overcome her natural tendencies and that is why she wrote about it, as everyone working on his/her middos is keenly aware of them. Still, an additional push from R Meir did her over. There is a general idea that people have an ability withstand test that Hashem sends to you, but if you add up your own test, good luck with that! So, this creates both a question for Beruriah – why she put herself in danger; but even more for R Meir – why did he feel necessary to over-test her.
edited
down the memory lane – the word insurrection peaked up twice in google trends web search in last 18 years: first week of June 2020 and (3 time higher) Jan 2021. There was no interest in the word after Feb 2021. There is a little peak on Jan 4-5 of this year, 30x lower than last year, so this does not show a lot of natural interest,.
Also, if you put dates into google trends, every day has an annual peak – but September 11 has a 10 times higher peak. Jan 6 2021 has peak as high as the annual Sep 11 size. This year seems to be smaller, not finished yet.
So, no there is not much natural interest in J6.
n0 > It could easily have been said by someone who is very pro the constitution.
if you mean the professor story, I had to re-read it thrice to make sure he is saying “blame the constitution” as a call for action.
> I don’t know what I have to do with the czar.
He (all of them) was the guy who stubbornly refused to switch to Gregorian calendar. They also built a railroad of different width so that it would not be used by the invaders. There are places in modern Poland and Lithuania where trains for some time had to switch wheels back and forth going through areas that were formerly under Russia. Well, maybe we in America should not judge too harsh – as Mauritania being the other country still using imperial measures!
ujm > Republicans should double the size of the federal circuit courts,
note that R- are relatively restrained here (as it fits “conservatives”). It is usually D-s who break the rules/tradition, like filibuster for judges, and then R-s get one chance to retaliate. This is a losing game – both for the country as safeguards are thrown away one-by-one (who remembers now that Senators were supposed to be appointed by State legislation?) ; and also it is always advantage D-s when a next breach will occur. One of Trump’s attractions was that he is capable of fighting same level as opponents, without restricting to an honorable but losing position.
ujm, see my comment above. You can use a klal a priori to recommend not to have Gemora in Bays Yaakov, but when you meet a Beruriah and she corrects your speech, you better pay attention.
Empirical evidence: when my daughters hear Daf Yomi I am listening, they do not care much. But when there is an interesting sugya and I describe it to them, they have no problem understanding and relating to their other learning and human psychology.
Syag > I don’t think finding out the truth is as easy as clicking a link. I believe clicking the link is what fed them the garbage.
I agree. It is not easy to figure out what is true on hot issues. I sometimes read a pretty convincing claim (yesterday: there is British report that shows that masks at schools did not help) that I am suspicious of only because it contradicts my prior views. I actually go to this 20-page report and it says mostly the opposite several times on page 1 and an ambiguous caution note at p. 15 that was (mis)quoted. Now, if I would not suspect it, I would buy the argument. If I would not read the report, I would have partly discounted my previous views.
This is a total failer of free speech. The original American idea was let’s everybody say whatever they want, so that the public can evaluate their claim. By now, free speech is weaponized by references to pseudo-statistics, and the public now includes people with no ability to analyze those claims.
the middle is enabling the extremists. Currently, political parties can precisely slice the electorate into blocks and divide it close to 50% (not the total votes, but the power – see Senate at 50%, House at 51%, Electoral college by 10Ks of votes). So, when it is impossible to change any of the voter preferences by reasoning, then all you can do is outrage people so that more of them actually vote (as US has lower voting rates than other countries) and engage extremists. Then, politicians are reluctant to offend those easily-offended crazies to such degree that, for example, Trump who did great things in vaccine developments can’t praise that without being booed.
Trump expressed the same in much shorter way, addressing the Black community with “what do you have to lose”? It is now acknowledged that he significantly moved Hispanics to the right, so there is some hope. Not sure whether any English-speaking electorate is capable of changing their opinions.
ujm, what is your principle? There is a clear difference here: either you trust majority and then you are in favor of pure democracy, or you want to be more conservative and create various entities and slow-down rules that require super-majorities and agreement across different geographic areas and social groups for law-making. There was even an original proposal to introduce the same in the executive (3 co-presidents representing north, middle, south). Polish seim used to have a veto system – where one member was able to block legislator and this eventually failed the country, including due to foreign (Russian) influence who could always buy off a couple of members.
So, if you are looking for a middle ground, you need to look at it empirically – did we go too far in one or another direction? Looking over 200+ years, US seems to be doing not bad comparing with peers. Looking more at the downside – US escaped a lot of social turmoil that grappled Europe and corrupted government of South America. Maybe England, Canada, and Australia have comparable success, but they can’t defend democracy in the world lately without US. Is the secret simply in speaking English and being separated y water from Europe?!
Immediate use of this hysteria is to give cover for getting rid of filibuster in the Senate: 3 D- senators who actually signed a letter 5 years ago that they’ll stand by the filibuster rule now are saying that “J6 changed everything”. A professor admonishes young politicos who blame Republicans for “standing in the way of progress”, takes them through history and explains that you actually need to “blame the constitution”. He means it in a literal sense – not to explain that the youngsters are wrong, but that rather than getting rid of republicans, they need to get rid of the constitution to move forward.
How do general rules work? Rav Yehuda is not dismissing Beruriah just because an average lady is not boke in shas. As my first statistics teacher, my grandmother O’H who never took a formal course used to say: a cow drowned in a river that was on average up to her knee.
We should not have so many therapists. Maybe let’s have having less problems. Raise your hand if your school teachers have training in psychology, if you as a parent (or your parents) had some training. And results of any follow-up evaluation on how teacher/parent performs.
Gadol, sounds like the J6 reruns worked as sobering medicine for your tds, or should we just call it a “retroactive vaccine”? great news
re:vaccine, let’s do retrospective review: original ph. 3 results were:
20x reduction in transmission 2 weeks after 2nd vaccine, assuming same behaviors.what changed or is better understood now:
for getting infected:
1) effect gradually decreases from 2 weeks, so several months later it maybe 5x not 20x
2) did not change: effect is roughly the same for all age groups, with similar decrease for all
3) variants decreased effectiveness
4) there seems to be a conclusion that 3-4 weeks between doses is too short. Better to have more time between them to get longer immunity that is now being improved by boosters. The idea was to get to full 2-doses faster. I think Brits are doing 2 months now, but US still does 3 weeks.
Here, as in other aspects, the big guy dismissed former guy’s successful team and also his own advisors who were useful for pre-election PR and relied solely on government thinkers, severely limiting new ideas, so public policy flows by itself uncontrolled.5) mixing mRNA and JJ/AZ seems to work well (JJ first), but not tested/advertised enough – companies do not care and gov did not pursue
6) kids were underestimated. They were first presumed not to contribute to transmission.
for serious sickness:
1) immunity seems to be holding against variants and time pretty well despite variants
2) vaccines were not optimized for long-term T-cell production. There are several vaccines in development that try to focus on that. Maybe months away from productionyou see, last year – some Yidden did not learn for a day, and the world almost fell apart, windows broken, senators in danger, and a brandon was certified President. Tells you to take your learning seriously.
crazy,
people used not to have information, now they have too much information. They clearly can not process it. It did not sgtart now, maybe 100-200 years ago with mass propaganda – newspapers, then radio, Tv, etc. We got anarchists, communists, nazis – all masses of people following crazy ideas. So, maybe things are not getting worse, they were bad for quite some time!So, when dealing with issues that are understood for some time, like taxes and schools – society has established positions and most people can navigate between them. Suddenly with an unusual situation, people lose ability to navigate situation as their reasoning abilities were never high.
Avira, ok. There was a Rav, whom I also can call a Rebbe the way you do, who moved to EY and was asked – which party do you support? He answered firmly: party of Moshe Rabbeinu!
TS Baum, I hear you, but we should take that learning mood and project it to the rest of our lives.
Little frogie, pay attention: the czar already switched to gregorian calendar and learn how the knight moves!
coffee > why you are asking the CR instead of a rabbi
if you discuss first with hevrusas, then you can clarify your question. Furthermore, I once asked a Rav what is important in answering questions (it is his main occupation, after all). He answered – most important is to help the person clarify his question.
shlucha, please let us know the answer and the references!
There is no doubt that the concept of a gadol/gaon/etc existed in various times, but to what degree it matters might have changed. I am wondering whether litvishe world got influenced by chasidim to some degree – having an identifiable leader seems to be popular.
In general, it is a republican idea: you ask a shaila of you rov, he asks of his rosh yeshiva, and he asks someone higher. This graph generates one or more figures at the top. Some may be specialized in certain areas, others – more general. Say, Rav and Shmuel were both gedolim, but we accept their psak based on the topic. Not sure whether the difference of expertise was apparent at their time or established over time. We see something similar now – there are people for whom Rav Chaim is a posek for learning, but for covid halokhos they don’t hold by him and go to ploni ben shapiro.
jackk,
first Tevet 23 was on Dec 27!Furthermore, I bet this would not have entered your mind, if you wouldn’t be tuning into some news or site or paper. Please, please tell us what caused your mind dwell on that, I am really curious how this enters our community.
Also, it is a yohrtzeit of 3,000 Americans who died from Covid on that day and 1,300 who died today – 6 to 12 months after Brandon “shut down the virus”.
>> and my 3rd answer, Rav chaim, made him very settled… I have never met Rav chaim, but I knew it would make him happy to say it.
maybe this was not worded accurately? What is the heter to change words even if you are speaking to a drunk, and even if he is a husid. Or was he physically threatening you?
smerel > An unheard of 19th century author
avira >> On the other hand, klal yisroel has adopted this story – when we start dismissing such traditions out of hand, we are on a slippery slopeThis is a slippery slope. Kuzari principle states that the Torah is proven v. other religions because it was given publicly to millions of people, rather than a small band of people, and then passed thru generations and could not have been conceivably introduced later on. If we take our trust in Golem to the same degree, we will successfully disprove Kuzari.
Re: Ravina,
front page article provides this explanation for a more drastic case:
> there can be a complete disconnect between an individual’s talent and the evil that he commitsI don’t agree with this. I think this is downplaying what a Talmid Chacham is.
> I don’t follow so Sherlock Holmes, and Peter Pan have some truth because they are so well known?
Can we stop destroying everything!? I personally was in Sherlock Holmes’ home and I have a (Purim) hat to prove it.
Avira, why are you questioning someone’s ability based on a klal and a book you read. This is unbecoming.
Avira > I’m not going to cry over others’ misbehaviors;
Do we have a source that condemns women who learned Gemorah properly? R Eliezer says it is like teaching them shtus, but b’deavad – if they did not learn shus, would it be OK? R Yehuda talks favorably about Beruriah – not for learning Gemorah, but for learning Gemorah well – and from multiple teachers. Or, would you say, if someone did something risky and survived – she did an aveirah? Even with this, R Eliezer’s position seems to apply to the teacher, not to the student.
If you think Maharal is so awesome, you should cling to each of his words. Let’s raise hands here – how many books by Maharal did you learn?
Syag, are you saying that there were no people who refused to wear masks? We had lovely discussions here with people explaining how bad masks are. Same in person, here and, as reported by reliable witnesses in other towns. Maybe I am not understanding your definition.
same article on applicability of the Harayot priorities:
Rabbi Auerbach states it is impossible to apply these rules in our times.Rabbi Feinstein seconds this approach.
Minchat Shlomo, 86:60
Iggrot Moshe Choshen Mishpat 2 73:2, 75:2
Along these lines the Mishnah Berurah states that we have no Torah Scholars in our time and this cannot be used as a way to decide, which person should be saved fi rst (547:12), the Magen Avraham states this as well.From the same article on pandemics, fascinating references:
Tzitz Eliezer vol. 9 28:3 – if you can spend same amount of vaccine on 100 old OR 1000 young patients saving, on average, same number of lives. for older people, you reduce chance of dying, for young – eliminate completely. We give vaccine to younger – claim for certain saving is higher than uncertain.
based on Pri Megadim Siman 328 in the Mishbatzot ZahavTzitz Eliezer 9:17 a physician should put himself in danger in order to stop an epidemic and save
more lives, as opposed to the regular situation where a physician is prohibited from placing his life in dangerRabbi Daichovsky told the author, we must vaccinate the super-vectors, a.k.a. young children, because they are considered Rodfi m, one who pursues another individual to kill him. we vaccinate health care workers before anyone else. This is because health care workers are needed to fight the epidemic
quoting from a secondary source Rationing During a Pandemic Flu Aryeh Dienstag (this is pre-covid article!). There are multiple reference to value of people to society
Horiyot 13: men over women (in saving, but not in ransom), kohen over israel over mamzer, but Talmid Chacham before Am Haaretz, even if a King [T’Ch is irreplacable, King not]
Mishnah Berurah (OC: 547:22) – there are no Talmidei Chachamim at our times [AAQ: this might have changed 🙂 seems not to be the current opinion, though]
Rambam on Mishna Haroyot 3:8 – we do save King before Talmid Chacham because people need him
R Tendler: human life is infi nite and therefore cannot be prioritized objectively. Practically, however, society may need certain persons more than others and therefore prioritization can be used
R Oshry (Shoah, selecting people to send to die): duty of community leaders to take courage and operate in any way they saw fit to save as many people as possible
R Auerbach: age does not go into the equation of whom one saves first. What one should only look into is the level of danger and the chance to save the most people
private communication with Rabbi Daichovsky he told the author that there is a value in saving people whom society needs in order to preserve a functional society
Gadol > in some deep Red jurisdictions
I am sure this is also happening. The path on both sides, seems to be – we will counter their lies with our lies, and then double them. This is not going to end well. At least as public schools are going, they are funded by the taxpayers and should generally reflect taxpayers’ will (which may differ by state).
A typic al example would be a US government high school class where in one of the first classes the teacher starts explaining that Senate is not representative and he wishes that would be changed. I am sure this is his opinion and he is very sincere. Still, this is not what he was hired for. But a possible solution is not that hard:
1) publish curriculum
2) do random testing of students and see if an abnormal number of them hold biased opinionsa MUCH more problematic case is a story about illiterate peasants coming to a Jewish mill. The miller will count the sacks by putting a penny for every sack. Then, the miller will go to the back to get the money to pay. The peasant will see the pennies and steal them …
Red > any different than buying day-old bread from a bakery
difference is that the store sells day-old vbread as “day old”. Here they advertise “one week rentals”, they do not suggest “two for one week”, they just cannot accept a return during their week off. At least, this is how I understood it.