Forum Replies Created
I think that Matan’s answer is correct in that they were making up for missing Sukkos that year and according to Bais Shammai the lighting of Chanukah neiros is somehow tied to the parei hachag.
However since we pasken like Bais Hillel the implication is that we don’t hold that the reason is parei hachag, bringing back the Bais Yosef’s question.
We can answer very simply, however, along Matan’s line of reasoning. Chanukah means a dedication because fundamentally the Bais Hamikdosh (and Klal Yisrael) was rededicated to Hashem. The Chanukas HaBais for the Mishkan was 8 days as was the Chanukas HaBais for the 1st Bais Hamikdosh (I don’t know about the 2nd). They therefore made Channukah, as a holiday of dedication, 8 days.
The mitzvah of neiros was to light one candle and l’mehadrin, to add to the parsumei nissa and kedusha, to add a candle each night until you have eight.
It seems to me that the decision of whether or not to divorce should be entirely based upon what would be best for the children. In cases of abuse or serious addiction divorce will almost certainly be better for the children. Other situations need to be taken on a case by case basis.
Children must be the focus. If, as I believe is the case, most parents are willing to die for their children, they should be willing to stay in an unhappy marriage for their children as well.
Where did you get the idea that the Torah was literally infinite? The Torah is described as an ocean. Oceans are very very big, and very, very deep, but they aren’t infinite.
I believe that the answer to your question is that the mathematical “infinity” doesn’t actually exist. The number line is a human construct, it isn’t a real thing. Actual infinity is impossible for the human mind to comprehend.
Example: Imagine an infinite number of marbles. Now remove one marble. How many marbles are left? The answer has to be less than infinity, which will therefore be a number. Now put the marble back. You won’t have infinity, you will have the previous number +1.
In other words when dealing with actual infinity, if you break it down in component parts then you will quickly run into the above paradox.
The only issur relating to negiah with a penuyah tohorah is the potential hirhurim which would be a violation of Lo Sosuru. Where there is no Chashash Hirhur, which I hope would be the case with respect to a 3 year-old niece, there is no issur.
The only possible issue is the Rambam’s declaration that hugging and kissing an Aunt is disgusting. Whether that would apply to young child is unclear, it would depend on the reason the Rambam held it was megunah.
I am confused at the issue here. There is no halachic reason women should not drive.
I have seen the Rabbeinu Yerucham that Pence is referring to. It is in Issur V’Heter L’Rabbeinu Yerucham 39.
A Kohen is not allowed to marry the child of a non-jewish father. It is a machlokes rishonim but we pasken that it is assur. V’im nissas lo teitzei.