AviraDeArah

Coffee, correct, i said it backwards. It’s a real chashash.

As for feeding animals being hanaah, the poskim say it regarding issurei hanaah, even if it’s not your animal, you enjoy it eating what you gave it. It’s “cute,” and that’s the whole reason why people feed them – they enjoy it.

Kuv, of course you should teach them about kitnios. I meant not to teach children that it’s normal to hold and deal with kitnios on pesach. There’s a sensitivity….same way we wouldn’t touch chometz that’s not ours.

Smerel, if we’re talking about eidus(which is what the two women from the shaar ha’aspah gave) then you’d be correct. You’d also be correct if levin said a shitel torah, or quotes a chazal.

Big people listen to anyone.

That’s not the case here. Levin allegedly said a very simple observation, and rav Yaakov, it is claimed, changed his mind from it. That doesn’t happen with gedolei Torah.

Lernt – proving a blog entry with some article in a lukewarm zionist /charedi lite/ MO forum doesn’t help anything. I was close with talmidim of rav yaakov, including rav belsky; it’s all sheker.

Where is this piece in emes leyaakov?

Sir, who says the kitnios in the farm wasn’t mixed in with the wheat feed? The issur of owning might be a kezayis, but when a person feeds an aninal, it’s called hanaah according to halacha. I don’t believe there is a minimum for how much chometz one can benefit from; it shouldn’t be any different than having hanaah from other issurim, like basar vechalav, which has no shiur.

Rather than acknowledge a kasha and seek a terutz, you just conclude that chazal were acceptable when they give you the history but not acceptable when they say repeatedly that Torah protects us.

What is meant on a simple level is that Torah gives us a kiyum,an existence, which is a huge miracle, while among hostile nations. The fact that we haven’t been wiped out despite attempts by everyone in every generation is a bigger neis than krias yam suf, says rav yaakov emden.

Itchie Meir levin was not a “rav.” He was an askan. A good askan, but also not above criticism, and had made errors regarding his presentation of Agudah’s daas Torah on the world stage.

Reb Yaakov never said such a thing. It’s laughable that a gadol would change because of a simple observation, not that that was ever the discussion to begin with.

What he DID say, speaking as a talmid of his yeshiva, is the exact opposite – when the satmar rov’s sefer on the 6 day war was published, they met (which occured often, as they lived near each other at the time).

The satmar rov had written that even if his sefer changes the mind of one yid, it’ll be worth it. Reb Yaakov told him, “I’m the one yid.”

Blogs are full of nonsense. If you want to know what gedolei yisroel held/said, talk to their talmidim!

ובאיבוד רשעים רינה

A pathetic, disgusting murderer, who emboldened criminals and was a hero for a community steeped in crime

I had the same question, but the roshei yeshiva know better. Despite the danger of the government drafting bochurim, the terrorists….they still said bein hazmanim should stay in place.

Maybe the cheshbon is that without it, the bochurim won’t be learning flasig anyways. It might be proper, but maybe they’re not ready for that kind of sacrifice, which might harm their learning next zman.

Coffee, they used to. They changed it for kiruv reasons, which in and of itself isn’t a huge deal.

Also they’re not the only ones who don’t wear streimels; stolin in America don’t either

Anon, the concept of chozer v’niur goes as follows:

When something is batul, nullified, in a mixture, this can happen through having 60x the volume of the nullified item, or the majority, depending on the case. Sometimes you need 100x..

Typically, the concept of chozer veniur means that if there was enough to nullify the item, but then more of its own substance was added, the material that was previously nullified is counted with the new stuff.

For instance, a pot has 122 ounces of chicken, and one ounce of chazir falls in. No problem, because you have 60x the chazir. But what happens if subsequently, 2 more ounces of chazir fall in – each one by itself would be batul, but when you add them together, you get 3 ounces, which would require 180 ounces of chicken to nullify. Do we say that what’s done is done, and the first ounce is as if it’s not there anymore, or do we say it is “revitalized” by the additional ounces.

That’s chozer veniur.

Reb E is saying that if the chometz was batul before pesach, do we say chozer veniur because now there’s a new issur that previously was not there, one which is not subject to bitul, as chometz on pesach is never batul, even in a mixture of 10000x itself. Do we say that the chometz should be looked at as gone completely, since it was batul before pesach, or do we say to look at it as still existing, and subject to the current judgement of not being batul no matter how much there is against it.

Sechel….

Please read my post. Rav Shach holds like the Taz. Nobody said kabalah isn’t Torah. The question is if you’re mekayam talmud Torah with it, because talmud Torah is to learn tanach and gemara to come to halachos. The shulchan aruch harav even, can hold that kabalah isn’t talmud Torah, if you go through his psakim.

He doesn’t write that it isn’t Torah or that it is; that wasn’t his discussion. His discussion is if you’re mekayam talmud Torah with it or not.

In maaseh ish talmidim testify that the chazon ish was an expert in kabalah too.

Aaa, it’s a halachik principle which permits activities that might be scientifically seen as dangerous but are accepted practice in society. The gemara is saying that danger will not befall people in such a situation, which explains why yidden in Europe weren’t dropping dead all the time from lung cancer, despite having smoked day in and day out.

Smoking is not considered acceptable anymore, so its dangers have more shlita in the world.

You’re reading it literally – it’s not saying that one who relies on shomer pesayim Hashem is himself a fool, rather the pasuk means that Hashem protects people from things that should be harmful if they would be communally aware of it, just one of Hashem’s wonders and kindnesses. Talmidei chachamim who were aware of the sakanah of tashmish with meuberes nevertheless did so, because of that shmirah. They weren’t “fools.”

Yankel, the zionists caused the Arab threat. Let them handle it on their own – that’s different than the Nazis. Plus, there’s no active genocide in eretz yisroel – if it would be that kind of situation, the satmar rov would have no problem cooperating with whoever is available to save jewish lives

Sechel….

Avi ezri was written by Rav Shach, not the Chazon Ish. The chazon ish wrote….the chazon ish.

And nowhere in either sefer is there any mention that kabalah is not Torah, chas veshalom. Rav Shach, as it happens, fiercely opposed Kapach, the haskalah -oriented yemenite “rabbi” who denied the zohar and kabalah.

I’m sure there’s ample motivation in chabad to demonize Rav Shach and make it as if he was against everything holy – he wasn’t.

Sechel represents the “man on the street” in crown heights, and CS is attempting to be the apologist, but both are quite telling in the current state of chabad.

The stories about rav aharon in mishnas reb aharon were told by talmidim and nobody came out and said there were glaring mistakes, and it was published when a LOT of original talmidim, like rav chaim Epstein, rav Meir Hershkowitz, rav laiby dicker, etc….were still active.

I doubt the askanim who arranged the satmar rov’s ticket were aware of what kastner had done to procure that train. The truth only came out later; if they did know, the satmar rov would have exposed it to save yidden.

“You can argue that the deal would have been made anyway so there was no issue with them buying their way in. That is no different than saying the knesset and the state of Israel will be there anyway. Let us do what we can to work with them for the sake of Torah”

If the interaction would be one-off then yes, but we’re talking about being entrenched in it consistently. Big difference.

Smerel, rav aharon Kotler dealed, in fact, with mafia people to get money to save Jews in Europe. There’s a famous story mentioned in mishnas reb aharon with a mob boss who was so impressed with rav aharon that he didn’t even want his money back, and instead asked for a blessing. Rav aharon couldn’t wish him hatzlacha, because of his criminality, so he bentched him that he should die on his sickbed, and not from being killed. The boss was extremely happy with this blessing, and indeed survived many gunshots, dying at a ripe old age.

Was rav aharon being “mischaber” with the mafia? No. Neither sas rav michoel ber weissmandl when he worked with secularists.

The difference between the above and agudah’s shitah is that joining a government shows your approval thereof,not that agudah actually does approve of it, but they work on laws, committees, meetings, they are literally part of the state. Agudah holds this is ok for their reasons, and satmar says it’s not. That’s the machlokes. It has nothing to do with who you can work for and who you can make deals with to save Jews.

The ben ish chai has an entire section devoted to hilchos tznius, called chukei noshim, where he mentions a lot of details that people today struggle with, besides the areas that need to be covered. He explains the centrality of tznius too – as does every other sefer that talks about it

Sechel, by your thinking, chasidus shouldn’t be important because it’s not in shulchan aruch. Neither is the idea of a chasidishe rebbe mentioned anywhere in the rishonim.

But those are ikkarim for tou, simply because your rebbe said so – which is fine, except when it comes to defending something your community is lacking in, you turn to something which you yourself don’t hold of when it comes to things you decided are important.

Does shulchan aruch say that giving someone chazir is lifnei iver? Does it have to?

Did you know that nowhere does it say in shulchan aruch that a mechitzah is required in shul?

Quit the hypocrisy.

That women receive punishment for being macshil men is in poskim which talk about lifnei iver – please read halichos bas yisroel, it’s a very good sefer. I don’t have it on me at home, but it’s readily available. It’s also no surprise that shlomo hamelech’s prime representation of the yatzer hora in mishlei is an immodest woman. Just as a source i remember off the top of my head, which i wrote above, is the peleh yoetz, which says that women will be punished first, before the men they were machshil.

As for whether or not women who keep halacha are nevertheless starred at by men, אונס רחמנא פטריה, the rule is that an oness is exempt from punishment. She’s not obligated to stay in the house for that. However to whatever degree she can centralize the home, that’s a fulfillment of kol kevudah, which is partially due to the above, but not limited to it.

Yankel, if by collaboration you mean joining the government, then no, the satmar rov holds that’s assur.

If you mean on an individual level, like a business partner, then it’s no different than a goy and you can.

If you’re referring to working with them to save jews during the Holocaust, then nobody every said that’s not allowed.

Aaq, rashi says pashut pshat in the pasuk refers to noshim. They’re not taught wrong.

Learn – did you ever read vayoel moshe?

He in no place says not to live in eretz yisroel. He,as you noted, did so, and sent some chasidim there. He was against making mass immigration there or making a state. Huge difference.

CS, why does something need to be in older seforim for it to be valid? Chasidus isn’t in any sefer before 200 years ago. The peleh yoetz was before that.

Halichos bas yisroel is full of sources. Rabbi falk’s isnt – he was writing mainly as an instruction guide, and most women aren’t interested in looking things up. Most women just want to know what to do and what not to do and not he concerned with the sources or even the reasons. I learned this the hard way when i was in shidduchim and afterwards; a simple “yes” or “no” is usually what they want.

The kitzur was written only 130ish years ago. And it was definitely not written for women.

Plus, all jewish women were tznius in those days. You didn’t need halacha shailohs and minimum requirements, because everyone was covered up and no one would dare do otherwise. There was absolutely no “fashion” industry and women didn’t wear clothes that were, to use an expression which somehow became popular among frum women, “flattering.” Take a look at pictures of European and sefardi jewish towns. More tznius than satmar! It was the הלוך ילך, the רוח אפינו – some things are so plainly obvious, so fundamental, that any simple jew knows them. Even the amei haaretz in chazal aren’t criticized for dressing untzius.

You’re defending the indefensible.

And to the point of being machshil others, LH only is machshil others if they believe it, and it’s not something the person walks around doing nonstop. A woman who walks around untzius will be machshil men every second of her life and amass boatloads of sins that will not he attoned for by asking your rebbe for forgiveness or learning his musings.

Besalel, it is logically deficient, because where does it say that it’s a flaw? Also halevi never said that it’s an actual flaw, chas veshalom, but rather intentionally designed to mirror a flawed human condition – that Hashem made us with flaws is very obvious. That was on purpose, not because of, chas veshalom, any mistake of Hashem.

As to why we don’t make a bracha…my theory is that to make a bracha, there needs to be a חפצא, a tangible, physically reactive phenomenon. The eclipse is merely an alignment; nothing is משתנה in the moon or sun.

A rainbow, one could argue, is also not a cheftza, but the bracha isn’t because of the wondermen, it’s because it’s a reminder of Hashem’s promise to not destroy the world again. That’s why it is a bracha of zocher habris, not oseh maysoh bereshis.

Those aren’t the only two options.

I argue for the sake of, i hope, kovod shomayim. And i do learn some things along the way.

There are some things I’m not open to, such as the avodah zara of nationalism, feminism, god-in-a-body ideology, internet filters not being important, drafting bochurim, and other things that the gedolim said were off limits.

But other things I’ll consider if they’re not apikorsus according to gedolei yisroel.

Sechel, want to know what chasidim think of tznius? Ever walk around Williamsburg? Kiryas yoel? Skver? Tosh? Tznius is THE ikkar by them and they’re stricter than litvishe!

Smerel, that’s sherut leumi in its current form, but it is still obligatory for all citizens without religious exemption. And many sefardi girls have a hard time getting that exemption, especially if they don’t look charedi.

Forced work outside of the home is what the chazon ish was very worried about. And it wasn’t as if it was a machlokes; the gedolei yisroel all said it was yehereg velo yaavor.

Simcha – i agree that pure volunteering isn’t what the chazon ish was concerned with. But you’d need to make sure rhe environment was kosher, which often is not the case.

Bear in mind that compulsory sherut leumi was just the backup plan once the medina saw that the frum would never let their girls into the military. Mizrachi didn’t see that and supported it, which caused a lot of problems for the Torah world, because the frei went and said “why is it good enough for them and not you”