? DaasYochid ?

I agree with golfer.

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.

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.

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).

Golfer: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/are-kollel-folks-better-jews-than-the-rest-of-us/page/3?replies=143#post-594976

its legal and not against Halcha,

Who is ??? referring to?

Better. Certainly the giver.

Now go back to my previous comment.

Squeak, not the worst, because there’s an element of maran b’seser involved – some preservation of dignity.

Welcome!

Of course, one can argue that we don’t take this Aggaditah literally…… 🙂

Or that it doesn’t apply when ??? comes from the ????? ?????.

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.

That is still not aggada, and the underlying concept is still true.

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

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?

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.

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?

Newbee, the gemara I quoted is referred to in Rambam and Shulchan Aruch. It’s not aggad’ta.

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.

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.

B”H

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.

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.

B’nos Trolla?

As for the initial post, has anyone denied that this was a bit low for the OU to do?

Yes

Randomex, tell me.

Joseph, that’s probably not Daas Torah.

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.