Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I agree with golfer.
That’s not said as a definition, it’s said as a reason.
There is a Gemorah, which learns the concept of money forcibly taken away as the RBSO counting it towards Tzedaka from a Pasuk (not a S’varah or a “why” type consideration).
It’s a giluy milsa, not a g’zeiras hakasuv.
So if they have hakaras hatov it’s okay?
Ask why it’s considered tzedakah even though it was not voluntary. Then see if the answer is universally applicable. Otherwise, ein l’cho bo ela chidusho.
Why?
I’m still trying to figure out what we’re discussing. Either way, I don’t think either gemara is necessarily relevant.
You said yourself why the second isn’t, and the first isn’t because there’s no indication that a non Jew’s forced tax payments are considered tzeddakah (which is a second reason that the second gemara isn’t relevant).
1) Girls not getting shidduch suggestions
2) Girls not going out
How does pushing off shidduchim for a year cause or even exacerbate that?
its legal and not against Halcha,
That doesn’t answer the question.
Who is ??? referring to?
Better. Certainly the giver.
Now go back to my previous comment.
Also, I agree with popa. I think we all may be addressing different understandings of the OP.
Avram, mind explaining?
Squeak, not the worst, because there’s an element of maran b’seser involved – some preservation of dignity.
Who is ??? referring to?
Welcome!
How do you define “the shidduch crisis”?
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/defining-the-shidduch-crisis
Of course, one can argue that we don’t take this Aggaditah literally…… 🙂
Or that it doesn’t apply when ??? comes from the ????? ?????.
Sam, even if the Rambam would asser, we don’t pasken that way.
Joseph, nine.
Newbee, this is clearly the former.
You know that we don’t pasken like that Rambam, that the meforshim say he would have agreed in a different era, and what R’ Moshe says about someone who wants to be “machmir” like that Rambam.
For some context, the OP was coming from a discussion which started here:
My position there is actually pretty much a b’feirush’a Rambam:
??? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=5&hilchos=27&perek=21&halocha=32&hilite=
That is still not aggada, and the underlying concept is still true.
?? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ?????
I’ll give you three guesses. The last two don’t count.
I think that the reasoning of narrowing down prospects is sometimes overly ridiculous.
Of course sometimes it is. But do you (or anyone) know how often silly nonsense is factored in? We hear the stories, because they’re both funny and sad at the same time, and stick out. But is it really that common?
Bump again. Someone is being taken way too seriously.
No hard feelings, but that’s not aggada.
It not not merely some vague message about the value of learning incorrectly using the lomed as an analogy.
It’s not literal in the sense that it’s a blanket issur, or that there aren’t factors to consider, but it’s a real preference based on what is typical for a talmid chochom. So sure, if what the gemara wants can be found where it’s not literally a talmid chochom (e.g. the Chazon Ish saying that marrying a Bais Yaakov girl is a kiyum of marrying a bas talmid chochom) that’s also fine.
The message that the gemara is saying isn’t vaguely about Torah, it’s about marriage, and therefore brought in those places in Rambam/Shulchan Aruch. The fact that the gemara expressed it in terms of a talmid chochom is because that is typically where the qualities desired are found.
So explain how you have a right to dismiss a gemara because you think it’s incorrect based in dismissing another gemara because you think it’s incorrect.
The gemara didn’t say a blanket issur, but it did give sound advice. You can learn through the meforshim, see the reasoning, and see how we apply it (or in some cases don’t apply it) l’ma’aseh. Just don’t dismiss it because you don’t find it PC.
You don’t like the second half, which proves it must be wrong, which proves the first half must be wrong. Okay, not wrong, just not literally, meaning the gemara doesn’t actually care who you marry, nor do the the Rambam, Tur, Sh”A. Have I got your reasoning correctly?
According to your “logic” we can dismiss all Rambam and Shulchan Aruch as aggad’ta.
Newbee, the gemara I quoted is referred to in Rambam and Shulchan Aruch. It’s not aggad’ta.
Perhaps its just me.
No, it’s not just you.
Generalizations are bad if you apply them incorrectly to a particular situation. They’re not bad for the sake of a general discussion.
My point is that as kollel is not a lucrative profession, it is to be expected that often he will need to spend time taking care of household needs, which someone with more money can avoid.
Of course that’s not what you said or meant, it’s just the logical conclusion to what you said.
What other points?
You missed what I responded: in the yeshiva community, all girls (well, most), even those who want to marry working boys, want to marry young. I think that’s a proper value, so if you want to change it by reducing the number of boys learning thereby allowing secular values to seep in to our community even more than it already has so that girls don’t mind if they don’t get married, I’ll have to disagree with you.
Also, if there were enough learning boys, the girls wouldn’t need to wait, so you are sort of being poseiach al shnei s’ifim.
So if the average “Yeraim” Baal HaBos works eight hours (most work more), commute (in the NYC area) two hours, and learn two hours, then shouldn’t full time be 12+ hours?
Sure, if you include the chores he needs to do because he can’t afford an at home babysitter.
As I explained earlier, if boys who would otherwise be working see strong incentives to be a member of an institute of Torah learning, it leaves fewer boys for girls who want working boys, pushing the issues there as well.
So there aren’t enough learning boys, and aren’t enough working boys, and it’s kollel’s fault. Kollel makes boys disappear, I guess.
B”H
While granted there isn’t the risk of overdose leading to death that many other drugs have, aren’t there significant health risks including that it literally makes users stupider?
I don’t know how significant or immediate or likely that effect is, but in some cases (perhaps such as writersoul’s grandmother a”h), we’re dealing with patients who are dying, on chemo to extend life as long as possible, and suffering from it.
Full-time means the same it would mean for a paying job. Advanced refers to a standard of learning which us obviously subjective. Technically, someone enrolled would be in kollel, the same way someone on the books at a company is technically an employee.
Those are not the kollelim women want their husbands to be in.
I don’t think prospective kollel wives want to get married any significant amount more than girls (from the same community) who want to marry working boys do. There’s plenty of agmas nefesh for these girls.
Just Google it.
This is what comes up:
A kolel or kollel (Hebrew: ?????, pl. ??????, kolelim, a “gathering” or “collection” [of scholars]) is an institute for full-time, advanced study of the Talmud and rabbinic literature.
The main issue I have is the optics that we have a religious institution getting involved in illegal activities, even though the DOJ is currently not prosecuting cases (my understanding is they could change their mind on a dime, retroactively).
This is where I disagree. The state declared it legal, and the federal government not only said they’re mixing out, they passed a law to that effect. It does not look like they’re getting involved in something illegal.
Oh, I guess if you define the shidduch crisis (nonsensically) as too many girls who want to marry kollel boys, you could say that kollel causes it.
B’nos Trolla?
How is “the burning need for many young girls (let’s say ages 19 – 23) to get married” a crisis, or how does it lead to large groups of unmarried singles? If they didn’t want to get married, lichorah there would be more.
The cynic is the one who defines kollel as a group of batlanim in it for the easy life. There are some (who are idiots because long term it’s harder), but it’s a minority and in no way defines kollel.
As for the initial post, has anyone denied that this was a bit low for the OU to do?
Yes
I don’t know how he knew not to do the surgery, so I don’t know if it was some sort of medical knowledge/experience, or just plain siyata dishmaya.
Randomex, tell me.
Joseph, that’s probably not Daas Torah.
For the most part, no.
We think they have better insight into what the ratzon Hashem is, and if we want to do the ratzon Hashem, we should follow them. We also think that through their learning, they become clear thinking and through their righteousness, the ability to be unbiased, and that therefore it makes sense to turn to them for advice.
In that world, males and females should be mature enough to make their own arrangements for tachlis purposes.
Why? Because it makes you uncomfortable that we successfully marry with the parents taking care of the checking, we should change? You can make up whichever rules you want – if you’re not old enough to be President of the United States, you’re not old enough to get married. It’s meaningless.
Some shidduch crisis wacko took out an ad saying “if your son is ready to go to Eretz Yisroel he’s ready to get married”.
All these “rules” are ridiculous. You could be ready to get married but not ready to do the necessary investigations to make sure the prospective spouse is suitable. You could be ready to go to Eretz Yisroel but not to get married. Don’t make unnecessary equations, judge each thing in its own.
BTW, it’s the older singles who need the dating coaches; most get married within a year or so of starting to go out, without needing it.
I’ll bet there are a whole lot more older singles among the crowd that does things your way than in the crowd which dies things my way.
I think it is lacking because many, if not most, disagree with it.